What is happening?

[redsturgeon]

Considering that it is reasonable to assume that someone with an IQ of 125 is clever enough to do any job and all four of the candidates reach that mark (even Stein who in all other respects appears to be away with the fairies) then all of them have the brainpower to be president.

I don't disagree with any of that, speaking as someone with an IQ that has been measured at over 150 but also someone who is aware that a very high IQ can be as much of an impediment to success in many fields.

Being a good POTUS requires many skills and qualities, a reasonable IQ being just one aspect, empathy, compassion, honesty, self awareness, good communication skills, negotiation skills, delegation skills being others. Some of these Trump possesses, some he does not. Some can be learned, others not.

Some traits that are definitely not useful would being narcissism, egocentricity, dishonesty and selfishness, I will leave readers to decide if Trump exhibits any of those.

Finally just to clarify, I don't think Trump is stupid, I just have seen no evidence that he has the 150+ IQ that gets talked about. I don't think that Trump's IQ score is the most important quality to consider regarding his suitability for POTUS though.

John

[Vision25]

I don't disagree with any of that, speaking as someone with an IQ that has been measured at over 150 but also someone who is aware that a very high IQ can be as much of an impediment to success in many fields.

Being a good POTUS requires many skills and qualities, a reasonable IQ being just one aspect, empathy, compassion, honesty, self awareness, good communication skills, negotiation skills, delegation skills being others. Some of these Trump possesses, some he does not. Some can be learned, others not.

Some traits that are definitely not useful would being narcissism, egocentricity, dishonesty and selfishness, I will leave readers to decide if Trump exhibits any of those.

Finally just to clarify, I don't think Trump is stupid, I just have seen no evidence that he has the 150+ IQ that gets talked about. I don't think that Trump's IQ score is the most important quality to consider regarding his suitability for POTUS though.

John

I agree.

Trump clearly has great communication, negotiation and delegation skills which is proved by his multibillion company, best sellers and blockbuster TV prog and electoral success. I would also point out that his skills in these appear far greater than Clinton who was fired from the Watergate inquiry, failed in her version of Obamacare, achieved nothing in the senate and whose tenure whilst Sec State was a dismal failure.

I also think Clinton is much more dishonest with her email server and taking money from foreign govts, wall street etc. She also comes across as more narcissistic and egocentric than Trump and I believe this is exhibited by her inability to get along with (or at least to fake being sincere with) ordinary people.

Don't get me wrong, I think Trump has a wrong set of priorities about free trade etc and I would not call him the optimal choice amongst 330m americans, however he is not thick, he is not a buffoon, out of the four candidates who put themselves forward he certainly appears to be the best.

Put it this way, some people call Trump a thick buffoon because they don't understand why he won.

If they want to be honest with themselves they will want to find out why they were wrong, this sort of introspection builds character.

How many will use this as a chance to improve themselves or will they continue to prefer their unreality?

Vision25

[redsturgeon]

Hey Vision25

We can't go on agreeing like this!

John

[DiamondEcho]

He has a genius level IQ

According to him maybe. I'd like to see it confirmed. John

Haha - you don't become a self-made billionaire by being a born fool, or even average + a very lucky.

[redsturgeon]

Haha - you don't become a self-made billionaire by being a born fool, or even average + a very lucky.

Number one. I didn't say he was a fool, just that I have seen no confirmation that he has an IQ of 156. Most research seems to agree he has an above average IQ probably in the 120-130 range.

Number two. Do you know how rich his father was?

Number three. I think there is research that shows a negative correlation between IQ and wealth.

John

[DiamondEcho]

Number three. I think there is research that shows a negative correlation between IQ and wealth. John

Haha

[redsturgeon]

Number three. I think there is research that shows a negative correlation between IQ and wealth. John

Haha

https://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2 ... nd-wealth/

I've now looked it up and surprise surprise, no correlation. You may of course be confusing income with wealth since there is a correlation there.

Here is a list of the 30 smartest people in the world.

http://superscholar.org/smartest-people-alive/

Billionaire Paul Allen is on that list...not many other billionaires though.

There are over 2000 billionaires in the world, are they all geniuses?

Other factors like: connections, hard work, desire for wealth and determination to succeed are as important as IQ in the business of getting rich.

One man who does appear on the list of smartest people in the world and is not a billionaire is Noam Chomsky. Here is what he has to say about Trump.

http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/3 ... am-chomsky

John

[brightncheerful]

In 2008, DT spoke to the FT and FT re-published it last week, DT's father (himself a property developer) told him that the secret of success is to 'get in, get it done, get it done right , and get out." The advice seems to have held him in good stead. In 1995, DT bought a building in Wall Street for $1M; it's now worth about $600M.

For all the criticism levelled at DT on this thread and elsewhere on TLF and TMF and elsewhere, mostly presumably by people who've never actually met him so are basing their opinions on what he's said (often taking whatever out of context) or what they've read about what others say about him, whether you like it not, the bottom-line is that he has been 'American-voters-elected' to be their next President and one of the most powerful jobs in the world. (That half the voters didn't vote is of no consequence: one could take the view they didn't mind who would get in).

Personally I'm not interested in arguing for the sake of it or finding fault in others at every step of the way as if a fault-finding micro-manager thinks themselves better able to gauge a situation. And even though my approach might not be to everyone's else taste, I do think life generally would be happier and the UK economically more productive if more people, particularly those not retired and therefore supposed to be getting on with their paid employ, were to desist projecting their angst onto others and instead focus on sorting themselves out rather than act like they own the place.

Rather than passing judgement on the man himself, in my opinion a particularly nasty and potentially self-confidence destroying British habit egged on by (social) media no doubt, merely because you don't share or approve of DT's methods, surely the decent honourable thing is to wait and see what he achieves and reserve comment until then, rather than continue to let off steam over something in which you've no involvement.

As I remarked recently, it's great that ordinary people feel able to express their opinions. And between parents and children particularly to have an open dialogue can be helpful. But in the wider world, a pity that they haven't yet realised that their opinions don't count for much in the scheme of things.

[DiamondEcho]

Chomsky, no, I don't think so. He passed his sell-by date 25 if not 50 years ago.

[redsturgeon]

Chomsky, no, I don't think so. He passed his sell-by date 25 if not 50 years ago.

You are entitled to your opinion.


Although some might suggest not if you haven't actually met the man in person.

John

[RowdyReptile]

Hi RR. Great post and I think you've really summed up the situation in the USA better than any other commentator I've seen. Is there any hope for things to get better over there?
I'm worried we're starting on this kind of facile politics too in the UK with slogans like "Take Back Control" etc having won the UK referendum.

Thanks for the kind words. As far as things getting better, from the overall big picture scheme of things, it is unlikely to get better when such a high percentage of Americans look to the Beltway boobs, or if you prefer the DC Dolts, to solve all their problems. A lot of our youth do not give much encouragement when they are screaming for "safe places" at our institutions of higher learning that should be geared to take you out of your safe place.

However, I think that although things look bad now, it isn't like the USA hasn't seen very grave issues in the past, and amazingly bad leadership. I am sure things will get better, but it will probably be by happenstance. What was the quote attributed to Bismarck?

There is a special providence for drunkards, fools, and the United States of America.

I don't know if he actually said it, but it sounds about right. How else can you explain America's rise to a great nation?

Actually, I do think our founders were great thinkers. And, now, their legacy is.......drum roll please...Donald Trump!

How delightful.

RR

[RowdyReptile]

What are your other reasons for voting for Johnson, are you libertarian lite?

Which do you dislike more, Trump or the duopoly as it is ironic that Trump may well end up destroying the duopoly that you so hate.

Vision25

It is interesting that you would call me libertarian lite. I will get back to that shortly.

Trump claims to be anti-establishment, but the truth is he is part and parcel to the establishment. He is just the other side of the equation. Someone buys, and someone sells, and Trump has been the buyer. This is a man who has had to probably grease off his fair share of politicians for gain, or at least give some hush money to get his way. He probably has paid some because he actually liked them, and he paid some that he did not like so they would go away. You know, sort of like a modern day black hand note.

Trump was amazingly cozy with the Clintons once. Now, they seem blood enemies. One wonders what they will be tomorrow. If I appear jaded and cynical to you, well you are right.

I also do not believe his running mate, Pence, is all that anti-Establishment. Seems like the typical Republican to me, and I am not impressed with the turn over in the Congress. I am not impressed as there really isn't that much. Hardly any. Yeah, real revolt against the "establishment" going on here.

I am a paid up member of the Libertarian Party. However, I do not score that high and the litmus test they give, and am reminded by some from time to time. I see that as a problem as well, because the party thinks we can spout our own slogans of individual freedoms and liberty, freed trade, peace and all that, and think everyone will come running to our banner. That is obviously rubbish. This is trench warfare, and has to be done in incremental steps.

So, I initially and enthusiastically supported Rand Paul. He is the son of libertarian champion Ron Paul. It seems the party loves the father, but is unsure of the son. Rand is a bit more practical imho. You cannot implement full libertarianism on this country, and subsequently the world, all at once. It is a tactic our enemies...the statists...the communists/socialists use.

To answer your question directly on who i dislike more...Trump or the duopoly...I dislike them equally because they are the same thing to me. I am willing to be proven otherwise, but at this point, I do not think so. I mentioned his VP pick earlier, and there is a rumor John Bolton and Rudy Guiliani are candidates for Secretary of State. Not exactly promising when you are saying you are anti-establishment.

Thanks for asking, btw.

RR

[RowdyReptile]

They could always introduce democracy, and then stick with it forever. Rather than promising it only to progressively exploit and bastardise it.

Democracy? That is the last thing the founders wanted, and certainly in its purest form. It seems that an alarmingly high percentage of people in the US haven't the faintest clue what system of government was created by the founding fathers. Not one clue.

This hints at one of the problems in the USA. Today we are having so called debates over popular vote v the electoral college. It is pretty apparent Federalist Paper No. 10 is not taught in our schools. It is ok to disagree with that bit by James Madison, but you better sharpen your pencil if you want to refute it.

But it gets far worse. Not only are the words of the founders hardly taught, but they are openly rebelled against in the most bizarre of ways. Recently, at the University of Virginia, the President of that institution was asked to not quote Thomas Jefferson. This was done in part by tenured professors as I understand it.

http://www.richmond.com/news/virginia/a ... 23d28.html

So I guess, The Declaration of Independence should never be quoted again at a school that Jefferson founded.

I do not think I need to further explain, as this kind of stuff is part of our problem over here. No clue of the founding, the history and therefore no clue of how to fix supposed problems. No idea of the actual problems either, but regurgitation of the same people that can't fix much of anything frankly. Sad.

RR

[swill453]

The actual election result seems to have dropped off the news. Still Michigan to declare, Trump is in the lead there at the moment so if it goes his way the final college votes would be

Clinton 232
Trump 306

Surprisingly large margin.

Scott.

[zico]

Clinton is leading the popular vote by over 1 million now (and rising all the time), but has lost the electoral college (the one that decides the election) by a wide margin. Before the election it was expected that Trump might win the popular vote but lose the electoral college. But because Trump won quite a few states by a small margin, the opposite has happened.

[swill453]

I notice that "Others" got over 6 million votes, more than 3 times as many as in any of the last 3 elections. Says a lot.

Scott.

[zico]

This thread's title is just so appropriate!

Latest news from Trump Towers seems to be a cross between a TV soap and an edition of the Daily Mash.

Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner has taken over control of the Trump transition team (TTT) and fired Chris Christie (the previous head), who prosecuted Kushner's father back in 2004 for witness tampering and fraud, resulting in him being sent to jail for a couple of years.

Meanwhile, Rudy Guiliani is a strong contender for Secretary of State, but it's emerged that he's been heavily involved with foreign governments and organisation, including an Iranian opposition group known as the Mujahedeen Khalq, or the M.E.K. — drawing payments at the same time it was on a State Department list designating it a terrorist organization. He sought to persuade the State Department to revoke its terrorist listing, which the Americans did in September 2012.
This is the man who was making such a big deal about the Clinton foundation dealing with governments and organisations abroad.

And the man himself said to Theresa May "if you ever travel to the US you should let me know". Maybe she should tweet him when she does!

It's certainly an entertaining spectacle!