The dangers of depending on headlines for news updates

I just spent half the morning wondering why Black Lives Matters is going to kill 45,000 horses. Is it a protest? One horse per life ended or something?

Oops. Wrong BLM.

The Bureau of Land Management!

Though I still have no idea why they want to kill a bunch of horses, at least that makes more sense than Black Lives Matter doing it.

Advertisements

A Conversation with Two Trump Supporters

Just today, I had a conversation with two actual Trump supporters in person in my office. This post is a real account and is not an attempt to be funny in any way (okay, so I do attempt to be funny because that’s just what I do, but I’m not fabricating the event in an attempt to be funny). This actually happened.

Supporter 1 is a white legal immigrant from south Africa. Truthfully, I don’t know if he’s from the country of South Africa or simply one of the countries in the southern part of the continent (I’m an American; you’re lucky that I can even find Africa on a map and know that a country called South Africa exists). He likes Trump because Trump has actually accomplished something with his life as opposed to Senators Cruz and Rubio who have been “public servants” all their lives. He equates being a politician to pretty much living off the government dole.

Supporter 2 is also a legal immigrant. He’s a darker-skinned Muslim from some middle eastern country (again, I play the American card here regarding not knowing his exact origins). He likes Trump because Trump isn’t afraid to give voice to problems. “How are you ever going to solve anything if you’re too afraid to even talk about it?”

I don’t think that you can draw overarching conclusions about anything based on such a tiny sample size, but maybe you can start to say, “Trump supports are more diverse than we thought.”

 

Breaking Down the Foreign Policy Case Against Trump

I know very little about foreign policy, but I’ve noticed that Trump’s stances are being highlighted more and more as a primary reason not to vote for him. As a reasonable person, I want to know more. It’s hard, however, to find well reasoned pieces that aren’t filled with all kinds of hyperbolic tripe.

Let’s go through one of the articles that I found:

We do not transgress Ronald Reagan’s Eleventh Commandment lightly.

That’s a good start. I’m on the lookout for well-reasoned, thoughtful articles. If you write something that I completely disagree with, but you do it in a manner supported by facts, I’m completely cool with that.

Let’s see how they justified their transgression.

But whether or not he believes his own words, merely uttering them renders him unfit to be commander-in-chief.

They’re not exactly winning me over to their ability to be reasonable from the outset.

Every modern presidential candidate who is realistically attempting to attain the Oval Office shares one trait: They will say whatever they need to say in order to get elected. During the primaries, they preach to their base. During the general election, they move toward the middle, most of the time in ways that directly contradict everything they said in the primary.

Is this an admirable trait in any candidate? Nope. Is it a reasonable trait considering that their doesn’t seem to be any way around the necessity? Yes.

Just by the fact that his words have propelled him into the driver’s seat for the nomination proves that the words were reasonable.

Under a Trump presidency, our allies would detest us and our enemies would have contempt for us, or even pity us.

Great. Now we’re getting to the meat of the issue. Tell me more.

Nope. That’s it. The authors simply made that statement and let it stand.

Literally, the entire article contains not one word that actually supports and explains their position.

Did they not write this:

as signatories to that letter, and as co-editors of Shadow Government, we want to elaborate on that statement in explaining to our readers why our role as the “loyal opposition” may well put us in the uncomfortable yet necessary role of standing in loyal opposition to our own party’s presidential nominee

Where, then, is the explanation that they promised?

Now, being reasonable, I have to say that they linked to other letters that promise some type of actual policy statements, and I’ll have to find time to delve into those. For the moment, though, I’m left with this thought, “What, exactly, was the point of their article?”

EDIT: I followed the link from the original article that was supposed to bring up the actual letter. The link didn’t work for me.

 

Dear Tom, the only political rant I’ll give ya- I grok Trump.

Here at one reasonable person, I believe that it’s important to understand what drives people. Instead of thinking of Trump supporters as stupid or evil, I think we should delve into what they see in the man. Here’s as good an explanation as I’ve seen:

I’m not saying I’m a Trump supporter, or that I have been a Trump supporter or that I will be a Trump supporter. Neither am I sold on Sanders. But I’ll tell you this~ I NEVER want…

Source: Dear Tom, the only political rant I’ll give ya- I grok Trump.

Rubio’s Minnesota-only strategy pays off handsomely

If you need a good laugh this morning, read this post:

ST. PAUL, Minnesota—putting all doubts about his candidacy to rest, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) swept to victory last night in the Minnesota caucuses, with more than 41,000 votes and a solid margin of …

Source: Rubio’s Minnesota-only strategy pays off handsomely