PostHeaderIcon Conflicts Over “The Donald”

I admit to being totally conflicted and confused over the apparent success of the Donald Trump campaign for POTUS.

For instance, I find very little that Trump says or promises that I disagree with. However, in many cases, common sense tells me there is no way he could actually bring off what he promises. Even were he to win the election with the largest margin in history, the sold-out Congress will still be there, the ultra corrupt bureaucracy will still be there, the partisan court system will still be there, the appallingly ignorant population will still be there.

Yet, I reason, why not at least try?

Then there is that other thing. That thing that I cannon explain in rational terms. It is a creepy feeling skulking around in the shadows of my mind that there is something all wrong about all this. That Trump surging onto the scene may somehow be too good to be true. That he may be some sort of siren-song, poised to lead us to our ultimate destruction.

Truth is, I just can’t come to an attitude, a feeling about all this that sits easily upon my being.

Several things I know for sure: As noted above, I agree with much of what Trump suggests. Without a doubt, he has made most of the other candidates look and sound like warmed over spit – the possible exceptions being Cruz, Carson and Fiorina. I like the fact that The Donald says what he says without much concern for Political Correctness or what the Media might think or say in response. I also like the fact that he will attempt to answer any and all questions thrown at him, even if the answers are sometimes more wishful thinking than realistic plan.

I think that the first debate on Fox was an ambush from the word go and that The Donald handled it as well as anyone could have been expected to. As a side note, Megan Kelley’s part in said ambush was, IMHO, disgraceful. Not just the questions asked but the obvious venom with which they were hurled made me forever distrust and even dislike her. Chris Wallace was almost as bad but I already had categorized him as as weasel.

As for Fox in general, I can’t quite figure that out either, One the one hand, they seem to be anti-Donald while, at the same time, turning Fox News into The Donald Show. I am surprised that other candidates do not charge Fox with making a major contribution to the Trump campaign.

One area in which I vehemently disagree with Trump is his proposed way of dealing with China. I agree fully that China has taken much business away from the United States. However, I think it was and still is our own fault. Our corporate taxes are insane and we seem to think our regulatory system exists for the sole purpose of destroying any business that dares try to succeed within our system. It is also true that Asia, primarily China and Japan own a huge amount of United States debt. Again, whose fault is that? They certainly did not insist that we borrow such that we can live beyond our means.

Finally, a trade war, brought on by tariffs, would be insane. Can none of us remember that similar actions nearly a century ago helped turn a short-term economic glitch into the most devastating economic depression in modern history? We certainly do not need THAT again.

So, I have rambled and ambled about without any clear answer re: The Donald and whether I should support him. I guess a large part of my distress is this – I pride myself on using rational thought rather than emotion to guide my life. Yet, with The Donald, I have to be honest enough to admit that my reactions to him have, so far, been dominated by emotion rather than rationality.

I like most of what he proposes (emotion) while a rational analysis tells me that there is no way he can do most of what he says. Still, I like that he is saying it – I insist that it needs to be said (emotion). Could it actually be that, Reagan like, merely getting us emotionally involved with our nation’s wounds and its needs is, by itself, of sufficient value to support this curiosity of a candidate? Only time will tell. Meanwhile, it would be great to know what some of you folk think about all this.

Please respond. Perhaps, together, we can find something rational in all this.

Troy L Robinson

38 Responses to “Conflicts Over “The Donald””

  • Jerry Elkins says:

    How do you know he can’t do what he says. Building a wall and having the turncoat US companies pay for it is a no brainer. Trump is not saying kill trade with China. He is saying this one way street is BS. Changes need to be made, but our muslim president doesn’t know what to do and if he did his handlers would not permit it. So called inside the beltway like Will and Krauthamer, Hayes, need to shut up. Bush is a milk toast dude for full amnesty. Carley loves Islam. Carson doesn’t know squat outside a hospital. Nice man, but still. Rest are reruns except Cruz, but Cruz can’t win. Perry is a joke. Graham is a joke. Santorum wants a job, any job. And Paul? Lets write another bill Rand Paul that goes nowhere.

  • I agree completely. Even if Trump can’t do what he says, who can? What are the powers of the president that don’t need the cooperation of Congress? Deciding which laws the dept of justice chooses to enforce, military policy and troop movements, Supreme court appointments, and foreign relations all have some effect, veto power may be the biggest at this point. I think this is why the establishment so hates a Libertarian candidate that they simply won’t let them or their ideas take hold. The most powerful president is the one who uses the veto frequently. The nice thing about Trump is if he could be bribed, we at least know he doesn’t come cheap. I’ll still stick with the son of Dr. No, but Trump may be good enough. He has experience negotiating from a position of power, unlike the current president.

  • Chris says:

    Wish I could help you Troy but like you I have more questions than answers. Trump sounds good and I do like his style. PC out the window and plain talk. I’ll start by saying that if he should win the nomination I won’t feel bad giving him my vote. There’s no doubt he’s a doer. I give a lot of weight to the fact that he has an entirely different skill set than any politician in the last fifty or more years. He runs things and they are done his way. He doesn’t need a study and a consensus from multiple committees of self serving players to make a decision. Whether that is an asset or not remains to be seen. We haven’t tried it in a long time.
    When we look back through history it wasn’t the whining special interests or the chronically aggrieved that built this country. It was the captains of industry that generated the wealth and built the infrastructure that powered the economy. Later known as “robber barons” by the previously mentioned aggrieved for all they had accomplished.

    I have no idea if Trump can do what he says. What I do know is that save a couple the rest of the political class won’t even try.

  • Chris says:

    @Troy. Any interest revisiting this eight months later? Has your opinion one way or another solidified? Just curious because mine surely has.

  • Troy says:

    Well, he has toned down some of the rhetoric — but, overall i would say my position is bot the same.

    As stated before, I will support the Liberterian which is much the same as not voting.

    Troy

  • ◄Dave► says:

    Welcome back, Troy. I hope you had an enjoyable cruise in Europe. Speaking of Cruz and Libertarians, depending on what happens in Indiana Tuesday, I my need to go re-register as a Republican, so I can vote for him in California’s Republican Primary.

    Pick up your jaws, folks. Yes, I have been cheering Trump on during the Primaries, and would never vote for the oleaginous Canadian Born Citizen in the General election, under any circumstances. It would only be a strategic Primary vote. If Trump does well in Indiana, he will undoubtedly reach 1237 in California on June 7th. This would shatter the entertaining prospects of the absolute chaos (and perhaps even mayhem) a contested convention in Cleveland would bring to the GOPe.

    Even though I suspect they will self-immolate over Trump’s nomination anyway, and seriously doubt that Cruz could win the second ballot either, the spectacle would be a political junkie’s dream come true. I deserve that finale, before I retire this life-long hobby, so perhaps I could make the effort to try to help make it happen. 😀 ◄Dave►

    • If Trump does well in Indiana, he will undoubtedly reach 1237 in California on June 7th.

      Trump being ahead in California is stunning period.
      That is a serious indicator of exactly how fed up the voter is. It is like sitting on the Andreas (close by here … lol) with a 4.5 moving toward a 8.4.

      I LOVE IT! 😉

  • Chris says:

    By all means do so Dave. A solid plan if I ever heard one. 🙂

    • ◄Dave► says:

      Somehow, I expected you to like it Chris. 😉

      Tell me, though, if somehow Trump is stopped, do you really think they will give it to Cruz on the second ballot? What do you think about the future of the Republican Party if they actually did so?

      On the other hand, what if they didn’t and instead managed to do to Cruz what they (and he) are trying to do to Trump, choosing instead a “White Knight” GOPe candidate? Any chance that you and other Cruz supporters, would feel about the same as Trump supporters would feel, if Cruz succeeds in snookering him out of it?

      What would that do to the GOP? It tickles me to see the elites now facing their own ‘lessor of evils’ dilemma. Now that neither Cruz nor Kasich have a mathematical chance of attaining 1237 delegates before the convention, which unpleasant scenario offers the best opportunity for them to save the Party from permanent destruction?

      1. Hope that Trump is stopped, then deftly skip over him and Cruz both, to select a ‘grand compromise’ nominee?

      2. Hope that Trump is stopped, then try to coalesce the reluctant Party behind nearly unanimously disliked Cruz as the nominee?

      3. Hope Trump actually wins 1237 before the convention, and get over it, so that even if he loses the General, they don’t permanently destroy the Party over either of the other two options?

      Which would you honestly choose? If you were Reince Priebus, and focused dispassionately only on what is best in the long run for the Party itself, which would you choose? I think these are difficult, but fair, questions. ◄Dave►

      • LOL … I know Dave your comment was for Chris but I could not resist entering my 2 cents.

        1. On NBC alone I would not vote for Cruz if he stepped on stage claiming to be God … which I expect he will do next as a real last ditch.

        2. There is no way in hell I would just “not vote” … I am still mired in the tradition this country was founded upon. I EXPECT to keep at least that one freedom to participate even if it is for Mickey Mouse.

        As for the GOP (3) … I would expect at some point the GOP survival mode will kick in. The more than uncomfortable up to their eyeballs quicksand the GOP finds they are stuck in gives me a laugh a day.

        My guess? These government fools who could not keep a job at the nearest Taco Bell somehow expect to save their bacon by controlling Trump.

        LOL … good luck on that path.

        Dave have you considered that Trump might also be an objectivist?

        • Chris says:

          We welcome your support of Ted Cruz in November. 😉

        • ◄Dave► says:

          There is no way in hell I would just “not vote” … I am still mired in the tradition this country was founded upon. I EXPECT to keep at least that one freedom to participate even if it is for Mickey Mouse.

          Except that it wasn’t, CT. Our Founders detested the very idea of democracy, which they equated with mob-rule. Benjamin Franklin famously defined democracy as two wolves and a lamb deciding what to have for dinner, and Liberty as a well-armed lamb contesting the vote. 🙂

          There is no ‘right to vote’ in our founding documents. How the States chose their electors for the Electoral College was entirely up to them. The notion of the 17th Amendment putting the selection of Senators up to popular election, rather than being chosen by the State legislators as their representatives in the Federation, would have made them puke.

          With all due respect, thinking of voting as an exercise in Freedom, is a cruel joke. We were carefully indoctrinated in government schools, to think of doing so as a civic duty. You will never need worry that the oligarchs might deprive you of the privilege of voting. They need the illusion of choice, provided by their sham elections, to legitimize their bought and paid for politicians as so-called ‘leaders.’ In Australia, it is now illegal not to vote!

          Dave have you considered that Trump might also be an objectivist?

          It never crossed my mind, CT. I doubt that he ever thinks much about philosophy or ideology, although Rand’s promotion of capitalism likely had a positive influence on him. No, he is very much a statist, and probably comes closest to being a Fascist. He would make a perfect ‘strong-man’ dictator, and I suspect that if he ever were actually elected to the office of POTUS, he would make Obama’s overuse of Executive Orders look timid.

          I view him only as a much needed wrecking ball, to demolish the Incumbrepublocrat duopoly, not as a potential statesman or savior of the Republic. Such dreams are futile. 🙂 ◄Dave►

        • I view him only as a much needed wrecking ball, to demolish the Incumbrepublocrat duopoly, not as a potential statesman or savior of the Republic.

          I have not been looking for a potential statesmen or savior of the Republic have you?

          “Wrecking ball” Trump certainly is … it matters not what happens next … the roll has began.

          I doubt that he ever thinks much about philosophy or ideology

          What makes you think that Dave?

          thinking of voting as an exercise in Freedom, is a cruel joke.

          You knew my response was going to be … that is IN YOUR WORLD not mine … right? 🙂

          My philosophy or ideology is “the world is what you perceive it to be”.
          If mine aligns with others fine … if not also fine. 😉

          As for your founders … there is no doubt they are rolling over in their graves and puking as we type. LOL

          • ◄Dave► says:

            I have not been looking for a potential statesmen or savior of the Republic have you?

            No, that is Chris’ job… 😉 ◄Dave►

          • ◄Dave► says:

            What makes you think that Dave?

            I have spent a fair amount of time observing Trump in his rallies and interviews. While he is obviously intelligent and quick witted, his mind is easily distracted by the stream-of-consciousness narrative it is constantly running. It appears to be a decidedly undisciplined mind, which outwardly reacts to those distractions with thoughtless speech. These utterances very often give listeners an unfavorable impression, which he could not have intended. He then subsequently wastes far too much valuable time trying to defend, clarify, or countermand those negative impressions. E.g. at every mention of illegal immigration, his mind interrupts him to expound on how much he loves Mexicans, and how many of them he has employed over the years. If he mentions trade with China, it requires him to replay the loop about how much he loves the Chinese, how much money he makes dealing with them, and how their largest bank is a tenant in one of his buildings.

            In my opinion, pondering philosophy and/or ideology, especially comparatively, requires the ability to focus one’s mind and concentrate. I have observed no evidence of his ability to do that, nor any inclination to try. No matter how nuanced or treacherous an interviewer’s question, he never seems to take even a moment to process it, and formulate an appropriate response. He usually just says the first thing that pops into his mind, and the devil take the hindmost. In many ways this can be refreshing, charming, and often entertaining; but it can also be rather embarrassing, when it reveals that he has never really thought through the intricacies and ramifications that would be required, to have a cogent and defensible opinion on the matter. ◄Dave►

          • ◄Dave► says:

            My philosophy or ideology is “the world is what you perceive it to be”.
            If mine aligns with others fine … if not also fine.

            Interesting, CT. Your tolerance for the opinions of others is admirable; but does this mean that you have settled all doubt in your mind, which is now closed and beyond influence or change? At our age, firm opinions born of experience, often represent well-earned wisdom. Yet it would seem to me, that considering how much I once thought I knew, later turned out to be so very wrong when new data became available, that ending my lifelong quest for learning now would be foolish. Nor would I expect anyone to pay the slightest attention to my own opinions, if I were to categorically ignore and dismiss theirs. My “About” page offers:

            …I have a lot of diverse interests that shift, and opinions that evolve, over time. It would be a dull world if everyone agreed with me on every subject. I don’t expect or even desire that. I would think it foolish if my disagreeable thoughts on one subject were to cause you to dismiss the validity of my arguments on another, but what you do in your own head is your business. What has and is happening in mine will be openly and honestly revealed here…

            …This is a temple for the rational mind, and nothing else is worshiped hereabouts.

            You will find mine uncommonly open. All my ideas and opinions are open to challenge, and few things give me as much pleasure as having my mind changed by a cogent argument. ◄Dave►

            Even Chris has managed to infiltrate the defenses of my worldview from time to time, to change my mind. Your mileage may differ… and that is also fine. 😉 ◄Dave►

        • We welcome your support of Ted Cruz in November.

          Ya think? 😉

        • Chris says:

          LOL I don’t know but as a “critical thinker” you are most likely to do the best you can with the hand that is dealt. As will I.

        • Chris says:

          No, that is Chris’ job… 😉 ◄Dave►

          A dirty job but somebody has got to do it. Actually I don’t look for a savior to save anybody. Inspiration and examples that bear success to help others save themselves is the only way to any successful change. A nudge that causes others to have to pull on their adult pants and face the music is the order of the day at this point. Whether they do or not is up to them. I only seek the opportunity for it to happen. I don’t believe the majority of the country is dead yet. Just being lazy. I may sound overly optimistic but like I said. It’s a dirty job.

          • ◄Dave► says:

            A dirty job but somebody has got to do it.

            Are you sure, Chris? The ‘Republic’ is a mental abstraction, which like ‘Nation,’ ‘Country,’ or ‘Union,’ is just another synonym for ‘Government.’ Government, of course, is the structure by which the rulers control their sheeple, and is the very antithesis of Liberty. Thus, saving the Republic equates to saving the government, which stifles Liberty, and perpetuates the reign of the rulers.

            I tend to agree with Reagan that government (of any sort) is not the solution to any problem; government inevitably is the problem.

            I spent my lifetime as an American loving Patriot, trying to support, defend, and perpetuate the Constitution. Yet, when one really thinks about it, the Constitution itself merely defines the structure of government. First, after careful indoctrination in government schools, I thought I was defending democracy. When I was sent to S.E. Asia at the age of 18, as a volunteer in the US Army, it was to “make the world safe for democracy.”

            It was another dozen years before I learned through independent study, that America was supposed to be a republic, not a democracy, and the difference between them. I have been diligently sharing that lesson with all who would listen, and trying to restore the ideal of our Founder’s Constitutionally limited Republic, ever since.

            Yet all that time, it really never occurred to me to seriously question their true motives for abandoning the Articles of Confederation, or whether the very notion of government itself, was actually necessary for the existence of civilization. I had to wait until I was 70-years-old, to finally get it, fully realize the true nature of government rule and rulers, and give up entirely on the belief that it was necessary.

            You don’t have to waste as much of your life as I did, perpetuating the rulers’ game, Chris. Put on your thinking cap, honestly open your mind, and stay tuned… 😀 ◄Dave►

        • I have spent a fair amount of time observing Trump in his rallies and interviews. While he is obviously intelligent and quick witted, his mind is easily distracted by the stream-of-consciousness narrative it is constantly running. It appears to be a decidedly undisciplined mind, which outwardly reacts to those distractions with thoughtless speech………….

          I have noticed many of those things about Trump also. I mentioned the same characteristic with Camille Paglia … a mind that moves much faster than one can speak.

          Personally other than it being a bit difficult to follow (especially with Paglia) … I pay it little mind.

          Very few people that I know have been trained to utilize a 30 second lag before they engage brain and open mouth to speak.

          Being called upon to be an educator, teacher, information giver (however you might choose to define it) my method was/is “one is taught in the manner one has the ability to understand”. As you can imagine that gives said teacher a lot of latitude in teaching method.

          I have yet to see Trump in any kind of mode other than his stump rhetoric to the 95% sheeple … so I did not expect to see a display of his philosophy or ideology.

          I just wondered what you saw specifically that I had missed 🙂

          • ◄Dave► says:

            Being called upon to be an educator, teacher, information giver (however you might choose to define it)

            I do make a big distinction between a teacher and an educator. Have you visited my Terms page? There are a lot of entries under the ‘Education’ heading. In what capacity did you teach? I have spent the past 20 years involved in the private Montessori school business. ◄Dave►

        • I do make a big distinction between a teacher and an educator. Have you visited my Terms page? In what capacity did you teach? I have spent the past 20 years involved in the private Montessori school business.

          I am aware of Montessori and heard good things about it. I do not know any children educated under that system. I expect it works well or you would have abandoned it after 20 years … correct?

          Yes I have seen your terms pages and did see your break down of educators and teachers. I suppose my answer would be both depending on the individual and circumstance.

          I deal with adults who have made a mess of their lives or are in the process (either real or imagined). They are willing to do the necessary work to fix themselves. Psychology, behavior modification, good old common sense, clinical thinking and a lot of careful listening are the tools, along with being painfully honest.

          My approach and Stefan Molyneux’s are similar but I do more listening, less open criticism and more do you think it would work better if? A lot of you can do this … because they can if encouraged. Somewhere in the middle of that is … if you want your world to change … change you and the rest will just happen. I know I am right and so do they. 😉

          • ◄Dave► says:

            Yeah, Montessori works well. See my essay “Spontaneous Minds” if interested. How minds are organized, learn, and function has always been an interest of mine. Speaking of changing them and behavior modification, I presume you know about NLP. I took a 9 month certification course in it about 30 years ago. It was taught by a trainer more focused on the business and sales uses of it, rather than therapy; but I did learn hypnosis and techniques for curing phobias in mere minutes instead of months, etc. As a sales tool, it is incredibly effective… almost manipulative. ◄Dave►

        • Yeah, Montessori works well. See my essay “Spontaneous Minds” if interested.

          I was and did … I loved it!
          Unfortunate this system is not a requirement.
          As you describe it … it is Utopian.

          Questions:
          What percentage of classes achieve that goal of excellence?
          May I assume all “guides” are not created equal?

          Where exactly does one find the “SAINTED GUIDE” who IS NOT covertly “piqued” when Aunt Tilly’s personally hand painted jug slips from those little learning hands? 😉

          Do you have children of your own Dave that were guided through this method?

          My experience is the younger the child the more easily they vibe to “disapproval” be it said aloud or covertly thought.

          I presume you know about NLP.

          No I had never heard of that until now. My quick study (thank you again for pointing a path) of the NLP agenda lost me at “In the belief system of NLP it is not possible for human beings to know objective reality.”

          I view that as a “crock” laid out by pseudo-intellectuals to sell THEIR PRODUCT.

          Hypnosis? … clearly works in many behavioral and psychological cases.
          Fast? sometimes … sometimes not.

          You probably have guessed my use of “manipulative” would be never … I deal solely in co-operative partnership or not at all. Dragging the unwilling is something I consider a waste of time. Both theirs and mine.

          My real interest in hypnosis was the study of the “regressive” kind. 🙂
          That IMO sheds some real light on what makes someone tick after the fact.

          • ◄Dave► says:

            Unfortunate this system is not a requirement.

            Agreed. You recently mentioned child abuse. To me, sending a child to a public school is a particularly egregious form of child abuse.

            What percentage of classes achieve that goal of excellence?
            May I assume all “guides” are not created equal?

            I have no idea of the percentages; but you are certainly right to presume that there are significant qualitative differences, in both schools and staff. The interesting thing, however, is that the Montessori Method works to a great extent anyway, despite any inadequacies of the adult in the room. It is the environment itself that provides the learning. Although currently moribund, you might find interesting another website I started several months ago: “Authentic Montessori

            Where exactly does one find the “SAINTED GUIDE” who IS NOT covertly “piqued” when Aunt Tilly’s personally hand painted jug slips from those little learning hands? 😉

            For the most part, we create our own. My partner is an internationally renowned trainer of Montessori teachers/guides, and has a Training Institute for the purpose in Southern California.

            Do you have children of your own Dave that were guided through this method?

            I never had any children of my own, although I helped raise a couple of them. My son was 7 and my daughter was 3 when I met them. No, I had never even heard of Montessori back then.

            “In the belief system of NLP it is not possible for human beings to know objective reality.”

            Good grief! NLP is not a belief system. It describes useful techniques for reading very subtle body language, establishing rapport, and changing behaviors with clever use of language. Yes, there were already a lot of charlatans trying to sell a “crock” of magic, even 30 years ago. There are probably a lot more now! A good book, which describes most of the techniques of NLP in layman’s language, without ever even using the term, is “Awaken the Giant Within,” by Tony Robbins.

            When I said ‘manipulative,’ it was because it was so effective at leading a customer to the decision to buy. Fortunately, customers who managed to find and enter my out-of-the-way Marine Electronics store, wanted to be sold on the product they came to investigate. It was my job to help them decide on the brand and model best suited for their needs, and help them convince themselves that they actually needed the new expensive ‘toy’ for their boat.

            Using the techniques I had learned in NLP, I could ‘read’ their basic personality and preferred representational system (visual, auditory, or kinesthetic), within moments of them walking in the door. Then, I could match, mirror, and pace them (e.g. adopt their posture, speak fast or slow, loud or soft, at their pace, etc.), thereby quickly establishing rapport, to the point that they very soon assumed they had met a virtual soul mate, even if in truth I found their personality rather repulsive. With just a couple of clever questions to elicit their motives and buying strategy, I would learn whether I should stress the features and benefits, quality, or reliability of the product they were interested in. By watching their eye patterns, I could easily tell what they were doing insider their heads, and react accordingly. Etc. ◄Dave►

        • Chris says:

          Darn salesmen. 😀

        • “In the belief system of NLP it is not possible for human beings to know objective reality.”

          Good grief! NLP is not a belief system.

          Oh … apparently the NPL University is not aware of that … LOL
          I copied that directly off their website:
          http://www.nlpu.com

          Perhaps I stumbled onto a different organization? 😉

          Anyway …

          Using the techniques I had learned in NLP, I could ‘read’ their basic personality and preferred representational system (visual, auditory, or kinesthetic), within moments of them walking in the door. Then, I could match, mirror, and pace them (e.g. adopt their posture, speak fast or slow, loud or soft, at their pace, etc.), thereby quickly establishing rapport, to the point that they very soon assumed they had met a virtual soul mate, even if in truth I found their personality rather repulsive.

          My guess you could already do that and the course just allowed you to utilize it better.

          • ◄Dave► says:

            Perhaps I stumbled onto a different organization? 😉

            I don’t consider NLP as an organization, any more than as a belief system. I read the article you referred to, and yes he is referring to the work of Bandler & Grinder, which they called, “Neuro Linguistic Programming” (NLP). I believe he was referring (somewhat unartfully), to the solipsistic philosophical argument, that the very existence of an objective reality outside one’s own mind, cannot be either proven or falsified, because it can only be experienced subjectively through one’s senses.

            The postulate that “the map is not the territory” refers to the fact that our mental perceptions and constructs, represent only our subjective view of reality, not reality itself. We learned that an external event perceived by our senses, is processed through filters in our unconscious minds, to create an internal representation of it, which in turn triggers a behavioral response. Modify the internal representation and one necessarily modifies behavior. Much of NLP is learning elegant techniques for such modification.

            My guess you could already do that and the course just allowed you to utilize it better.

            No, it wasn’t just a tune-up; NLP increased my social skills and salesmanship at least a hundredfold.

            As just one example of many, we learned that while half the population tends to move toward opportunity, the other half tends to move away from adversity. Generally, salespeople are by nature ‘move toward’ types. The way to motivate them as employees, is to offer a reward (commissions) for expected performance. Engineers, maintenance workers, and the like, are more likely to be ‘move away’ types. However distasteful, the best way to motivate them, is the subtle threat that their job is on the line. 😉

            Salespeople naturally tend to sell the same way they buy. They are always seeking cool features and benefits to justify a new purchase; so that is what they usually stress in their often exuberant sales pitches. Yet, they risk turning off half the buyers, who are perhaps only tired of their old model breaking down, have reluctantly decided it must be replaced, and aren’t particularly interested in the new bells & whistles. The astute NLP trained salesperson would ascertain this first, and stress the item’s reliability and warranty, more than its nifty features. Trust me, it works and works well! ◄Dave►

        • For the most part, we create our own. My partner is an internationally renowned trainer of Montessori teachers/guides, and has a Training Institute for the purpose in Southern California.

          Ahhh …

          I did visit the “Authentic Montessori” link you provided.
          A truly beautiful educational center.

          I can not think of a more perfect education for a tiny tot than what you explained. What a wonderful service you are involved with.

          With this kind of education for the young it would not take long before we would have an advanced more peaceful happy civilization.

          I recall years back having a discussion with one of my professors (who was also the head of the educational board) that teaching/testing children on curriculum that was of no interest to them was pointless. I would imagine children given freedom to choose what is of interest to them personally speeds up their learning considerably.

          He was not very receptive because he was somewhat mired in tradition. I knew from my own experience that what was my personal interest topic I was willing to learn double speed. If not luckily I had an excellent memory of what was being taught … at least long enough to pass a test on it later. Hard study was not my cup of tea.

        • Trust me, it works and works well!

          Okay you have tried it I have not.
          I can not argue with your success. 🙂

  • Welcome back Troy I trust your vacation was wonderful 😉

    For instance, I find very little that Trump says or promises that I disagree with. However, in many cases, common sense tells me there is no way he could actually bring off what he promises. Even were he to win the election with the largest margin in history, the sold-out Congress will still be there, the ultra corrupt bureaucracy will still be there, the partisan court system will still be there, the appallingly ignorant population will still be there.

    Yet, I reason, why not at least try?

    Indeed why not!

    Is there a better mouse trap?
    In my opinion ALWAYS!
    Do we test a theory in mind only or do we test it with practical use?

    Let’s face it we live in a world of sheep … what perhaps (95%)? That means there are what (5%) sheep-dogs?

    Of those sheep-dogs HOW MANY CHOOSE to be pack leaders?

    So where does this group stand?
    Sheep or sheep-dog?
    Sheep-dog? … active or retired? … 😉

  • Chris says:

    All very difficult questions. You do realize your glee over the conundrum faced by the GOP (although deserved) has oddly (but not surprisingly) left the democrat party unscathed and very much in control of their own “rigged process”. (much more so than the republican party) That’s not by accident and looking ahead to the general election it’s the only play they had. It’s worked well.

    The GOPe has only one play that would satisfy me and hopefully a majority of republican voters. It’s almost their only play. They need to step back and let the process play out pretty much as it is. They have to do a better job at defending the process and the history of it. Although the people have a voice in that process nothing about the US government or party politics has ever been a direct democracy decided with a plurality of votes. (which is what Trump is pushing with his rants. A most progressive goal.)

    Let the chips fall where they may. If Kasich or Ryan can go on the convention floor and win 1237 delegates fine. (although under current rules it can’t happen. They need to keep it that way.) If Trump gets the 1237 on the first ballot fine. (Get used to saying Madam President)If not it’s then up to the delegates. What they can’t do is go in and make large convention rule changes after saying that the rules are the rules in places like Colorado. They will be proving Trumps claims.

    Trump is a problem of a GOPe’s own making. Never mind all the BS about them underestimating the anger of the electorate. They knew that. They just thought they could use it. They could have stopped him early on but they thought he could be allowed to make the conservative wing of the party look foolish and yet be controlled and taken out at a later time. OOPS! This is evident even as recent as yesterday with the comments of the has been Boehner. (There’s a reason he’s gone and it’s probably one we don’t even know) Their hatred for conservative/libertarian thinking is no longer a secret. On the same note where Cruz is having his biggest success has to be disturbing to the GOPe as well. Cruz has the ground game and the delegate support he’s rounding up among the party grass roots serious players has to have them crapping their drawers. Those are the people that matter at least to the party. They lose those people and they hemorrhage down ballot elections all over the place.

    If I were to make a prediction it would be this. Trump could very well win the required 1237 on the first ballot. So be it. You then have to dance with the one ya brung. (Time for the GOPe to “eat their peas”)In that case It’s a Clinton administration. Trump doesn’t want to beat Clinton. (I don’t even think he wants the nomination.) The only other scenario is if Clinton beats herself with a DOJ indictment. If Trump comes up short on the first ballot Cruz wins on the second or easily on the third. Nothing the GOPe can do about it without self implosion. (Another helping of peas for table one please.) At that point Cruz will have to make the case that he “stole” nothing. He won through smart campaigning within the system that has been in existence all along. Quite possibly even conceding that the system needs modification and proposing to do so. If elected he would have the sway to effect such change. How well he can make that case will decide whether the GOP survives or not. IF it does it will be a much more conservative/libertarian leaning party. That’s the best we could hope for. If he can’t make the case we look forward to progressive rule for decades because Trump would have no intention of changing a “rigged system” that put him in power unless it were to a more progressive system. Ie direct election.

    See Cruz beats the liberal GOPe. Trump beats the whole GOP. Liberal, conservative, libertarian, and moderate alike.

    Just a side note that nobody is talking about. Remember that little showboat called “the pledge” by republican candidates? Where they all pledged to support the eventual nominee. Trump has broken that in spades but nobody cares. By attacking the process and calling it rigged he has attacked the republican party. By doing so he has attacked the members of that party including the eventual nominee. That includes himself if he is the one elected through a “rigged process”. What candidate that wants to win a party nomination trashes the party he wants to win? He’s said that the delegates he wants to vote for him have been bought off or bribed. He’s in effect accused them of corruption. How is that productive if his goal is to get elected?

    • Chris says:

      BTW in the case of a Trump nomination I will be voting Trump in November. LOL It wouldn’t be like it’s the first time I have held my nose to keep a democrat out of the Whitehouse. I suspect there are more republicans out there that will do the same without admitting it now. I can’t see any rolling over to Clinton. It’s the ones that won’t bother at all that will hurt.

    • ◄Dave► says:

      You do realize your glee over the conundrum faced by the GOP (although deserved) has oddly (but not surprisingly) left the democrat party unscathed and very much in control of their own “rigged process”.

      Again, Chris, the premise of this remark and most of what follows it, is that there is a substantial difference, between the Left and Right wings of the predominately Progressive Incumbrepublocrat duopoly, and that it actually matters to the future of the country which one wins elections. In my worldview, there is not, and it does not. For years, my interest has been in destroying the phony so-called two-party system of democracy, which has ruined the once cherished Republic of our Founders.

      Believe me, I am experiencing nearly as much pleasure over the mayhem Bernie is doing to its Left wing, as I am over what Trump is doing to the Right wing. He is just not nearly as entertaining, or delightfully politically incorrect, so he is less newsworthy. There is little point in my expressing said pleasure, Chris, because it would not tweak your dials. 😉

      I suspect the rest of your comment is about to become obsolete. We’ll know tomorrow night. From what I am reading, the Cruz campaign is collapsing. Beck is on his knees, fasting and praying. His father is preaching like a crazy man, and probably embarrassing him. His major donors are now withholding promised millions in funds he had planned for negative advertising. He is down 15 points in Indiana, 34 points in California, and he has promised Kasich he will not campaign in New Mexico or Oregon. What else is left for him? I reckon he’s done… ◄Dave►

  • Your tolerance for the opinions of others is admirable; but does this mean that you have settled all doubt in your mind, which is now closed and beyond influence or change?

    Tolerance? I never thought about it that way. I just believe everyone has a right to an opinion though I might agree or not. And no I get my mind changed all of the time. At that point perhaps we meet a consensus or not. If so then my life changes accordingly if not I carry on.

    My life is and has always been as far back as I remember a quest for knowledge.

    I think I said this already. There is always a better mouse trap and I am looking for it daily.

    When I find it just stay out of my way until I show you how it works.

    Where my tolerance comes to a screeching halt is with someone telling me, you can’t do that, we can’t do that, or I can’t do that when I know well it can.

    For me I,YOU,WE can’t is an excuse for mediocrity. Also not acceptable but I will not argue if that is someones choice as long as it does not involve me.

    Did that answer your questions?

Leave a Reply

Subscribe via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Political Spectrum
Political Circle
Archives
Blogroll
Internal Links