The Awesomeness of Trump

Brick wrote:

Lykeios wrote: What, I can't take what someone says personally? 0.o Not quite following you on that one...

I'm not saying you can't take it that way, I just don't understand why you would?

If its not something that is directed at you personally, or something that effects you personally in anyway, then how can it be taken personally? :laugh:

I completely understand why you disagree with him on things he's done and things he's said. I disagree with him on those things too. But that is not the same having some kind of personal beef with someone over something.

Fair question I suppose. But I think the reason I take his goals and words personally is so that I will be prepared to fight when he actually attempts to meet those goals. If it's personal, I give myself that much more reason to stand up against him and his ilk.

So hey, how aboot that Trump fella, eh? Ain't he some varying degree of awesome and whatnot?

Bias is going to shape what people see or at least the relevance of what they see against their own beliefs and opinions.

My faith in a system is not dependent on the people that represent that system. Because, we are all capable of both good and bad. So one should never blindly follow or oppose anyone. Especially politicians. Even the fictional Jedi understood the nature of politics and politicians and warned about trusting them because of the very nature of what they do.
:S
I do not judge all Jedi by the comments of a few. Nor do I judge any one Jedi by the content of a single topic or post. That is not the summation of the whole in any of those cases.

Whether I prefer the type or one politician over another is irrelevant. What I look for is policy and action, or inaction. Is what is done legal? Is it for the benefit of the whole, and not just a special interest group or small minority?

Also, no matter how I feel about a person, it is the office that deserves respect. Dislike the person occupying it all you like.

As to the awesomeness of Trump…
Out of the millions of people that exist and have existed in the US over the last two hundred and forty-one years, there have only been forty five people to hold the office of President of the United States of America. No matter how he got there or how people feel about it, he achieved what he set out to do.

:huh:

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote: As I said our founders did act on foresight that was based on wisdom of the past. If we do not learn from our past, fear and avoid those mistakes proven to be detrimental, we are only doomed to repeat those failures.

I agree 100%. We absolutely have to learn from the past (including recent elections) so that we don't repeat those failures.

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote: YES they did foresee! They may not have known the terms you describe but they knew the potential for corruption and evolution of this nation. They put every check and balance in place they could muster in order to keep those potential threats in check. So far they have succeeded immeasurably. For people now to ignore the past and not see the wisdom in their decisions is disheartening to say the least.

I don't think we can rationally discuss what the founding fathers foresaw, at least without a crystal ball. But it seems to me that corporations using their money as speech is a problem that they didn't see coming. And I say this too because there's no constitutional regulations (that I am aware of) that regulate the flow of money into congress by these corporations. Then you have the fact that it takes millions of dollars to run a campaign and often these legislators are spending over half their time fundraising. So in my mind money is definitely having significant influence in Washington. Now, the constitution tries to keep the president from being bought by foreign countries, so there is at least the intent being shown in that to avoid this kind of influence. But the means by which that influence can happen have evolved over time and I don't think the law has kept up.

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote: I agree completely, Amendments are in place for exactly what you describe. What they are not there for, though, is to dismantle what was put in place in the checks and balances of this system. No system is perfect and no system will ever be. Just as well, no amount of visionary foresight will ever conceive of every possible scenario and be able to plan for it. If we can come up with ways to improve the electoral college I’m all for it. I’ll vote for it and support it wholeheartedly. But what we should not do… in fact never do… is just abandon it all together in favor of popular vote or even worse do an end run around the constitution and implement something that will doom the nation to failure.

I'm not for abandoning anything altogether. I think many people see that balance is necessary. Checks and Balances are incredibly necessary. I simply believe that you also have to have checks and balances (regulations) on your corporations so that the corrupting power of their income doesn't translate into lives being destroyed (as they often were especially in healthcare insurance). If profit is the only motivating factor corporations will not necessarily act in good faith or uphold American values, or pay taxes, or support the wellbeing of the public. We've seen this. Honestly, the electoral college thing isn't a huge issue for me. I do think it is outdated and each state should have 1 vote. I think most of us are at least subconsciously unnerved at the ability for rural Americans to swing the election their way but I'm more concerned with money in politics. I understand why the electoral college exists. And I wouldn't necessarily end it. I would, however, reform it and make these all these tricks illegal that take away people's right to vote or have their votes count.

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote: No I don’t think we are veering off course. In fact I think we are finally getting back on course by putting the national govts emphasis on national defense and the economy again as it should be and getting rid of the bureaucracy and socialist reforms. However that is not to say that we as Americans should ever take our eye off the govt and its machinations. The second we do that is the second we lose ourselves.

so does that mean you want to end social security and medicare? What's wrong with universal healthcare? And what makes you think Trump is capable of any of this when he said he didn't know healthcare was so complicated?

Brick wrote:

Lykeios wrote: What, I can't take what someone says personally? 0.o Not quite following you on that one...

I'm not saying you can't take it that way, I just don't understand why you would?

If its not something that is directed at you personally, or something that effects you personally in anyway, then how can it be taken personally? :laugh:

I completely understand why you disagree with him on things he's done and things he's said. I disagree with him on those things too. But that is not the same having some kind of personal beef with someone over something.

This question reminds me of one of the sayings attributed to Jesus which I like a lot.

He said whatsoever you do to the least of these my brethren you have done it also to me. I'm not a Christian but this, to me, is a beautiful sentiment.

Especially in politics, people tend to have 2 choices.

1) You can say that your vote and your representative should be about your interests.
2) You can use your vote and influence towards your vision of the greater good of the country.

I don't think either way is invalid but it is a choice between self-ish and self-sacrifice. It is probably easier for me to tend toward the later because I'm not struggling. For those who are struggling it makes sense to save yourself first. If the airplane is going down and the masks drop you're supposed to but it on yourself first. For some I think the greater good is more of a luxury... one that maybe they don't think they can afford. But I think that problem results from the mal-distribution of wealth.

I think being a citizen of the same country should be more than about protecting each other from external threats. I think the internal threats are the greatest. What if there was no FEMA? What if there was no money for these hurricanes that are ravaging parts of the United States? Why do we pick and choose what qualifies as a disaster when there are so many people negatively affected by public policy? It kills me how some people seem to get on a high horse because they're pro-life but so much death can be prevented by things they don't agree with and don't want to pay for.

But if we could somehow put ourselves in the shoes of the homeless, the sick, the poor, the drug addicted, the LGBTQ, the uneducated, the black, the brown, the immigrants, the dreamers, and all those who are unloved by this system, the world would be a better place because we would stand up for them like we were standing up for ourselves. And we would fight as one for life, for liberty, and for the pursuit of happiness.

Manu wrote:

Br. John wrote: Do you consider yourself to have a mental disorder Kyrin? You present yourself as female here but on your Facebook page you're male? What's up with that? The Order does not consider being gay or transgender a disorder but we do want to respect your wishes and preference. What should it be? He? She? _____?

Relevance?

After going back and carefully reading the thread, I see the relevance for this argument. Apologies for the misunderstanding, I had assumed it was indeed a personal attack.

ZealotX wrote:

Brick wrote:

Lykeios wrote: What, I can't take what someone says personally? 0.o Not quite following you on that one...

I'm not saying you can't take it that way, I just don't understand why you would?

If its not something that is directed at you personally, or something that effects you personally in anyway, then how can it be taken personally? :laugh:

I completely understand why you disagree with him on things he's done and things he's said. I disagree with him on those things too. But that is not the same having some kind of personal beef with someone over something.

But if we could somehow put ourselves in the shoes of the homeless, the sick, the poor, the drug addicted, the LGBTQ, the uneducated, the black, the brown, the immigrants, the dreamers, and all those who are unloved by this system, the world would be a better place because we would stand up for them like we were standing up for ourselves. And we would fight as one for life, for liberty, and for the pursuit of happiness.

Thank you. You put it much better than I could have. This is essentially what I mean when I say "it" is personal. It reminds me of that poem about the rise of Naziism in the 30s, that one that starts something like: First they came for the communists and I did not speak out because I was not a communist...
If we don't stand up and speak out against hatred and bigotry when it is aimed against our countrymen, what does that say about us?

If Trump was any kind of decent human being he would have immediately decried those of his followers who show up to his rallies slinging racist slurs and inciting violence. He did not. In fact, he instead threw out the people protesting against such hatred. Shouldn't we expect a presidential candidate (much less an actual sitting president) to at least tell his/her followers not to behave that way? Shouldn't we expect a presidential candidate to not make jokes (or not jokes, depending on your interpretation) about grabbing women by the "pussy?" I mean, could you imagine if Hillary Clinton was caught saying "I can grab men by the cock if I want?" Could you imagine the republican outrage? Maybe I have higher hopes for the head of state of "the land of the Free and the home of the brave" than are reasonable? If so, maybe I am living in the wrong damn country.

Lykeios wrote:

ZealotX wrote:

Brick wrote:

Lykeios wrote: What, I can't take what someone says personally? 0.o Not quite following you on that one...

I'm not saying you can't take it that way, I just don't understand why you would?

If its not something that is directed at you personally, or something that effects you personally in anyway, then how can it be taken personally? :laugh:

I completely understand why you disagree with him on things he's done and things he's said. I disagree with him on those things too. But that is not the same having some kind of personal beef with someone over something.

But if we could somehow put ourselves in the shoes of the homeless, the sick, the poor, the drug addicted, the LGBTQ, the uneducated, the black, the brown, the immigrants, the dreamers, and all those who are unloved by this system, the world would be a better place because we would stand up for them like we were standing up for ourselves. And we would fight as one for life, for liberty, and for the pursuit of happiness.

Thank you. You put it much better than I could have. This is essentially what I mean when I say "it" is personal. It reminds me of that poem about the rise of Naziism in the 30s, that one that starts something like: First they came for the communists and I did not speak out because I was not a communist...
If we don't stand up and speak out against hatred and bigotry when it is aimed against our countrymen, what does that say about us?

If Trump was any kind of decent human being he would have immediately decried those of his followers who show up to his rallies slinging racist slurs and inciting violence. He did not. In fact, he instead threw out the people protesting against such hatred. Shouldn't we expect a presidential candidate (much less an actual sitting president) to at least tell his/her followers not to behave that way? Shouldn't we expect a presidential candidate to not make jokes (or not jokes, depending on your interpretation) about grabbing women by the "pussy?" I mean, could you imagine if Hillary Clinton was caught saying "I can grab men by the cock if I want?" Could you imagine the republican outrage? Maybe I have higher hopes for the head of state of "the land of the Free and the home of the brave" than are reasonable? If so, maybe I am living in the wrong damn country.

So, I have stayed out of this besides trying to stop what I see as a tasteless attack on someone (no i dont agree with her but it was still pretty uncalled for), but Lyekios, thank you for this post this is well put and I very much agree. I am not a fan of the Trumpster, but unfortunately he's what we got.....As for those intolerant jag bags who follow him (thats not all trump supporters btw, Zealots posts show you some who are just fed up with the system and that gave him a huge advantage over a dynasty name like Clinton) it is up to us as the opposing voices to peaceably attempt to silence them. We cannot lend ourselves to the title of villains in our attempt to fight them as that can cause more damage to what we really believe that almost anything else. Also, remember, those people in fact exist on both sides. we have slowly allowed ourselves to fall into the black and white (not race) division when it comes to politics and that is a huge issue towards any progress made previously (I have seen it in the protests I used to take part in) sadly I cannot risk my career engaging in them as it is in fledgling point right now.

Much Love and Respect,
Kobos

Kobos wrote: We cannot lend ourselves to the title of villains in our attempt to fight them as that can cause more damage to what we really believe that almost anything else. Also, remember, those people in fact exist on both sides. we have slowly allowed ourselves to fall into the black and white (not race) division when it comes to politics and that is a huge issue towards any progress made previously (I have seen it in the protests I used to take part in) sadly I cannot risk my career engaging in them as it is in fledgling point right now.

Much Love and Respect,
Kobos

I agree with this 100%.

On this site I sometimes feel like I should hold back so I don't offend the Sith population for fear that they will not understand what I'm trying to say. When I talk about the Sith on this site I'm not talking about them, but rather the Sith from Star Wars canon. My journey into Star Wars has a lot to do with gaining an understanding of both sides and how one crosses the line.

The (canonical) Sith all depicted almost with pitch-forks and horns, but they all had back stories and something they were fighting for. There may be a few exceptions but I'm talking about the Sith Lords with name recognition. Often something was either done to them or people they cared about and they set out to change things.

We always have to be careful not to see our own side as being 100% good because opposition to 100% good is automatically "evil". In reality, our side is not objectively good, but relatively good to a degree that is acceptable to us. We're not defending a utopia against a monster. What we're defending is a system that is good and evil against what we perceive to be a threat to that system.

For me, the relative good in the system makes the system more good than bad. And I want us to work together to keep making it better for everyone. At the same time, a lot of people felt the system was more bad than good and us working together to make it better was making it worse for them. So it's not that they are evil supporting evil to destroy America. They wanted Trump to disrupt the status quo and ultimately change things to the point that they could finally find some relief. And let's be honest. How many Americans noticed how much the low income whites were hurting in rural areas? I don't want them to hurt. I don't want money shifted away from them to serve someone else.

One of the things the prequels dealt with was the fact that slavery existed in the SW universe and Jedi weren't going around breaking those chains. So those who see the Jedi come and go and still remain in chains... what about them? Eventually, some of them will turn to the dark side in order to break those chains. It's only natural.

Trump is an interesting character. He lies more than he tells the truth. He tells people what they want to hear but he might keep a few promises here and there because he gets off on the praise and crowd sizes. He may think what he's advocating is right but he doesn't really have a strong moral backbone. He came in wanting to run the United States like a business without telling people just how cruel business can be when you divorce your decisions from social implications. Trump, (imo), has difficulty seeing, gauging, understanding, primary and secondary implications. People around him have to explain to him what would happen if he made these decisions. And sometimes he's told and sometimes he's not because people assume he already knows. I think his close family knows his issues and have positioned themselves around him in order to mitigate some of the damage he might do while others have positioned themselves around him so they can use him to do those very cruel things because they don't care about anyone outside of the group they support; likely feeling that those other groups have had more than enough representation and support and now it's their turn.

Trump is fundamentally (imo) a con artist who likes being one of the cool kids. If his popularity drops he's intensely angry and prone to attack people. He then does these controversial things because his base has a controversial agenda. He plays to his base any time he feels like the tides of his support might be shifting. When I first saw this thread my first thought was that it must be a joke. But we have to remember that there ARE good people on both sides and it's not that they like everything Trump does, but rather that they like that he represents and opposition to the system that has ignored them and left them economically behind through globalization. I think their anger is being misdirected and that the system allows corporation the "freedom" to do business overseas like they are doing now, but the problem is really the corporations using cheap labor but still wanting us to pay for the goods and services. It's not poor black and Mexicans who are taking their jobs. They're simply competing with these groups for the scant jobs left over from mass export of many other jobs. And it's not just cheap Chinese labor. It's also robotics... AI... automated phone systems, etc. Lower skilled jobs are being done by machines and people have to adapt. But until they do we're going to keep pointing fingers at each other in unhealthy ways while the rich simply get richer until there is no one left to buy their merchandise except for other rich people. Democrats haven't solved this issue. Republicans haven't solved this issue. That's why Trump exists.

ZealotX wrote:

Kobos wrote: We cannot lend ourselves to the title of villains in our attempt to fight them as that can cause more damage to what we really believe that almost anything else. Also, remember, those people in fact exist on both sides. we have slowly allowed ourselves to fall into the black and white (not race) division when it comes to politics and that is a huge issue towards any progress made previously (I have seen it in the protests I used to take part in) sadly I cannot risk my career engaging in them as it is in fledgling point right now.

Much Love and Respect,
Kobos

I agree with this 100%.

On this site I sometimes feel like I should hold back so I don't offend the Sith population for fear that they will not understand what I'm trying to say. When I talk about the Sith on this site I'm not talking about them, but rather the Sith from Star Wars canon. My journey into Star Wars has a lot to do with gaining an understanding of both sides and how one crosses the line.

The (canonical) Sith all depicted almost with pitch-forks and horns, but they all had back stories and something they were fighting for. There may be a few exceptions but I'm talking about the Sith Lords with name recognition. Often something was either done to them or people they cared about and they set out to change things.

We always have to be careful not to see our own side as being 100% good because opposition to 100% good is automatically "evil". In reality, our side is not objectively good, but relatively good to a degree that is acceptable to us. We're not defending a utopia against a monster. What we're defending is a system that is good and evil against what we perceive to be a threat to that system.

For me, the relative good in the system makes the system more good than bad. And I want us to work together to keep making it better for everyone. At the same time, a lot of people felt the system was more bad than good and us working together to make it better was making it worse for them. So it's not that they are evil supporting evil to destroy America. They wanted Trump to disrupt the status quo and ultimately change things to the point that they could finally find some relief. And let's be honest. How many Americans noticed how much the low income whites were hurting in rural areas? I don't want them to hurt. I don't want money shifted away from them to serve someone else.

One of the things the prequels dealt with was the fact that slavery existed in the SW universe and Jedi weren't going around breaking those chains. So those who see the Jedi come and go and still remain in chains... what about them? Eventually, some of them will turn to the dark side in order to break those chains. It's only natural.

Trump is an interesting character. He lies more than he tells the truth. He tells people what they want to hear but he might keep a few promises here and there because he gets off on the praise and crowd sizes. He may think what he's advocating is right but he doesn't really have a strong moral backbone. He came in wanting to run the United States like a business without telling people just how cruel business can be when you divorce your decisions from social implications. Trump, (imo), has difficulty seeing, gauging, understanding, primary and secondary implications. People around him have to explain to him what would happen if he made these decisions. And sometimes he's told and sometimes he's not because people assume he already knows. I think his close family knows his issues and have positioned themselves around him in order to mitigate some of the damage he might do while others have positioned themselves around him so they can use him to do those very cruel things because they don't care about anyone outside of the group they support; likely feeling that those other groups have had more than enough representation and support and now it's their turn.

Trump is fundamentally (imo) a con artist who likes being one of the cool kids. If his popularity drops he's intensely angry and prone to attack people. He then does these controversial things because his base has a controversial agenda. He plays to his base any time he feels like the tides of his support might be shifting. When I first saw this thread my first thought was that it must be a joke. But we have to remember that there ARE good people on both sides and it's not that they like everything Trump does, but rather that they like that he represents and opposition to the system that has ignored them and left them economically behind through globalization. I think their anger is being misdirected and that the system allows corporation the "freedom" to do business overseas like they are doing now, but the problem is really the corporations using cheap labor but still wanting us to pay for the goods and services. It's not poor black and Mexicans who are taking their jobs. They're simply competing with these groups for the scant jobs left over from mass export of many other jobs. And it's not just cheap Chinese labor. It's also robotics... AI... automated phone systems, etc. Lower skilled jobs are being done by machines and people have to adapt. But until they do we're going to keep pointing fingers at each other in unhealthy ways while the rich simply get richer until there is no one left to buy their merchandise except for other rich people. Democrats haven't solved this issue. Republicans haven't solved this issue. That's why Trump exists.

I'll just leave this here:

Against Me! wrote: We're all presidents, we're all congressmen,
We're all cops in waiting,
We're the workers of the world,
There is the elite and the dispossessed,
And it's only about survival,
Who has the skill to play the game for all it's worth,
And reach an obscure kind of perfection,
Let's try and keep as much emotion out of this as possible,
Let's try not to remember any names,
We'll do it for a country, for a people, for a moral vision,
United, we'll make them remember our history,
Or how we'd like to be told,
How we'd like to be told...

And we rock,
Because it's us against them.
We found our own reasons to sing,
And it's so much less confusing
when lines are drawn like that,
When people are either consumers or revolutionaries,
Enemies or friends hanging on the fringes
Of the cogs in the system,
It's just about knowing where everyone stands.
All of a sudden,
People start talking 'bout guns,
Talking like they're going to war,
'Cause they found something to die for,
Start taking back what they stole-
sure beats every other option,
But does it make a difference how we get it?
Well do you really ******* get it?
No, no, no, no,
No, no, no, no....