If Trump is re-elected what does it say about the I.Q of the average American?

[mogandave]

4 minutes ago, BusyB said:

 

You mean you went to a university.

Why did you clip the rest of my post? Probably because you, like most leftists are not able to actually formulate an argument. All you can do is nitpick. 

 

In any event, the person I responded said anyone “…university educated…”, that’s why said I was university educated. 

 

And no, it does not just mean I went to a university. 

[Will B Good]

Just now, mogandave said:

Why did you clip the rest of my post? Probably because you, like most leftists are not able to actually formulate an argument. All you can do is nitpick. 

 

In any event, the person I responded said anyone “…university educated…”, that’s why said I was university educated. 

 

And no, it does not just mean I went to a university. 

 

 

Why on Earth did you bite?....555

 

 

[Liverpool Lou]

On 10/17/2024 at 1:03 PM, advancebooking said:

Why do you support Trump. What are your reasons. Are you university educated? Are you Christian.

Why do you support Harris?   What are your reasons?   Are you university educated?   Are you Christian?

Note that questions end with a question mark, did your education not tell you that?

Edited October 18 by Liverpool Lou

[mogandave]

1 minute ago, Will B Good said:

 

 

Why on Earth did you bite?....555

 

 

“ Them what bite, gonna get bit. Them what don’t bite? Gonna damn shore git ate up.”

 

JDH, AGS, 1977, RIP

[gamb00ler]

1 hour ago, mogandave said:

He believes it.

LOL.... ergo.... he's unelectable.

 

Would you vote for the spiritual leader of the Church of the FSM?  What if he believes in it?

Edited October 18 by gamb00ler

[pub2022]

That it is way higher than yours.

[Will B Good]

Well worth a quick shufty.......could explain a great deal as to how Trump got to where he is......

 

Despotic leaders and religious systems serve similar psychological functions for those who are unwilling to take full responsibility for their own lives. By deferring to an external authority, whether political or divine, individuals can avoid the difficult task of making their own moral and ethical decisions. This abdication of responsibility is rooted in a desire for certainty and order in an unpredictable world, but it is ultimately a sign of weakness. Both forms of submission reflect a fear of freedom and an avoidance of the personal responsibility that comes with it.

 

In a society that values liberty and self-determination, it is essential to recognize and challenge this tendency to relinquish control. True strength lies in the ability to navigate the complexities of life without surrendering to external forces, whether they manifest in the form of a tyrant or a deity.

[OneMoreFarang]

13 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

Well worth a quick shufty.......could explain a great deal as to how Trump got to where he is......

 

Despotic leaders and religious systems serve similar psychological functions for those who are unwilling to take full responsibility for their own lives. By deferring to an external authority, whether political or divine, individuals can avoid the difficult task of making their own moral and ethical decisions. This abdication of responsibility is rooted in a desire for certainty and order in an unpredictable world, but it is ultimately a sign of weakness. Both forms of submission reflect a fear of freedom and an avoidance of the personal responsibility that comes with it.

 

In a society that values liberty and self-determination, it is essential to recognize and challenge this tendency to relinquish control. True strength lies in the ability to navigate the complexities of life without surrendering to external forces, whether they manifest in the form of a tyrant or a deity.

 

That reminds me of an interview with Jordan Peterson which I saw recently.

He explained that for intellectually challenged people it makes sense to be conservative. That's easier for them to understand.

Which kind of explains the situation with Trump and his followers. 

 

 

[Cameroni]

Just now, OneMoreFarang said:

 

That reminds me of an interview with Jordan Peterson which I saw recently.

He explained that for intellectually challenged people it makes sense to be conservative. That's easier for them to understand.

Which kind of explains the situation with Trump and his followers. 

 

 

 

No, it doesn't. Trump followers are not idiots. 

 

Conservatives are not idiots.

 

Friedrich Hayek was a conservative and he was intellectually more gifted than any Kamala Harris voter ever will be.

[bubblegum]

2 hours ago, mogandave said:

How so?

 

You can’t explain can you? 

 

The hilarity never ends with all the geniuses on the left.

No I cannot explain that to you.

[bubblegum]

2 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

No, it doesn't. Trump followers are not idiots. 

 

Conservatives are not idiots.

 

Friedrich Hayek was a conservative and he was intellectually more gifted than any Kamala Harris voter ever will be.

Although sometimes described as a conservative,^[22] Hayek himself was uncomfortable with this label and preferred to be thought of as a classical liberal or libertarian

[BusyB]

30 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

Well worth a quick shufty.......could explain a great deal as to how Trump got to where he is......

 

Despotic leaders and religious systems serve similar psychological functions for those who are unwilling to take full responsibility for their own lives. By deferring to an external authority, whether political or divine, individuals can avoid the difficult task of making their own moral and ethical decisions. This abdication of responsibility is rooted in a desire for certainty and order in an unpredictable world, but it is ultimately a sign of weakness. Both forms of submission reflect a fear of freedom and an avoidance of the personal responsibility that comes with it.

 

In a society that values liberty and self-determination, it is essential to recognize and challenge this tendency to relinquish control. True strength lies in the ability to navigate the complexities of life without surrendering to external forces, whether they manifest in the form of a tyrant or a deity.

 

Excellently put. 

 

There is more in depth analysis of that in Erich Fromm's 'The Fear of Freedom', which in my mind is far more important than his 'Art of Loving' - which every goofball claims to have read as if it qualifies them.

 

Isaiah Berlin's 'Two Concepts of Liberty' is a similar parallel political treatment (to my mind) of the same theme.

 

Both works are replete with the deep analysis and critical thinking which the better universities try to cultivate in their students. They are the exact opposite of Trumpian simplistic pseudo-solutions, which consist of nothing more than easily learned slogans, of no real utility in a 21st century, highly complex and top tier technology superpower of over 200 million people. They will all come back to bite their acolytes bigly in more than just the behind once the Project 2025 government control obsessives run out of 'enemies within' to dispose of.

 

Who will they hate when they've deported all the foreigners and jailed all the  lefties like me eh?

 

 

Edited October 18 by BusyB

[Cameroni]

8 minutes ago, bubblegum said:

Although sometimes described as a conservative,^[22] Hayek himself was uncomfortable with this label and preferred to be thought of as a classical liberal or libertarian

 

Yes, he even wrote an essay saying he was not a conservative. However, he was in fact a conservative:

 

F A Hayek was in fact a Conservative

https://www.adamsmith.org/blog/f-a-hayek-was-in-fact-a-conservative

[BusyB]

5 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

Yes, he even wrote an essay saying he was not a conservative. However, he was in fact a conservative:

 

F A Hayek was in fact a Conservative

https://www.adamsmith.org/blog/f-a-hayek-was-in-fact-a-conservative

 

Of course he -deleted- well was lol

[bubblegum]

1 hour ago, Cameroni said:

 

Yes, he even wrote an essay saying he was not a conservative. However, he was in fact a conservative:

 

F A Hayek was in fact a Conservative

https://www.adamsmith.org/blog/f-a-hayek-was-in-fact-a-conservative

Funny. He himself says he is is not but another says he is and you stick with the latter. Another thing, I see nothing conservative at all in Trump. But that's not the point. Maybe I'm to European to see the difference in the American way of thinking.

[WDSmart]

I'm an American and a US citizen. The most disappointing thing for me about Trump is that so many people (45% or more of voters)  support him. I don't know if they really agree with everything he says or if they are just angry and dissatisfied with their lives and have just been conned by him. Whichever it is, it's very problematic to think there is any hope for my home country going forward. 🥹

[OneMoreFarang]

16 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

No, it doesn't. Trump followers are not idiots. 

 

Conservatives are not idiots.

 

Friedrich Hayek was a conservative and he was intellectually more gifted than any Kamala Harris voter ever will be.

 

Let me try to explain it again:

Anybody with an IQ below 100 is not necessarily and idiot. Some are, but some are just below average.

And for those people it makes sense to do what people always did. It's called being conservative.

People who are smarted have at easier to understand new concepts and they have the option to be "progressive".

Obviously smart people can still be conservative. Why not?

 

And, in case you missed it, this whole thread is not about progressives vs. conservatives. It's about Trump, who is obviously not a traditional conservative. And that should be obvious to anyone who understands the concept of conservatism. 

 

[BusyB]

9 minutes ago, bubblegum said:

Funny. He himself says he is is not but another says he is and you stick with the latter. Another thing, I see nothing conservative at all in Trump. But that's not the point. Maybe I'm to European to see the difference in the American way of thinking.

 

Thatcher loved him.

[OneMoreFarang]

6 minutes ago, bubblegum said:

Maybe I'm to European to see the difference in the American way of thinking.

You forgot the quotes around "thinking". 

[pedro01]

lol - if anyone votes for Kamala - then they obviously have a room-temperature IQ as she does. 

 

The Trump Vote is the smart vote. 

[advancebooking]

7 hours ago, Berkshire said:

I understand the OP's frustrations.  I feel the same.  It used to be that Americans cared most about the candidates' character.  You know, things like integrity, honesty, decency, morality, etc.  Policies also mattered, but character seemed to be most important.  Trump has none of these character traits.  So yes, I too wonder how anyone can support such a rotten human being.  Do Americans not care about a person's character anymore????

The most sensible post in the whole 8 pages of this thread. 

[Cameroni]

19 minutes ago, bubblegum said:

Funny. He himself says he is is not but another says he is and you stick with the latter. Another thing, I see nothing conservative at all in Trump. But that's not the point. Maybe I'm to European to see the difference in the American way of thinking.

 

Well, you have to look at the substance, not the dust jacket.

 

Trump seems a bona fide right wing nationalist, and nationalists are always conservative.

 

Of course Trump is conservative, he wants to conserve the non-hispanic, non-black make up of the US with his anti-immigration policy, he wants to save US industry with tariffs, abortion moderation, how is he NOT conservative?

 

 

[BusyB]

4 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

It's about Trump, who is obviously not a traditional conservative. And that should be obvious to anyone who understands the concept of conservatism. 

 

 

Interesting. You're right - he's anything but traditional conservative. Though he is dangerously anti-progressive (for want of a better contrast word).

 

I've not really tried to pigeonhole him politically. His creed is money and greed. He seems to stand for no other policy than his own aggrandizement.

 

He is also clearly coming off the rails and unfit. However, it's way too late for the Reps to switch the ticket to a younger generation the way the Dems did. So they're gonna try and heave him into office at any cost, then retire him a year or so in to replace him with Vance.

 

Then the US can really look in for some serious faeces.

 

 

[Cameroni]

15 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

 

Let me try to explain it again:

Anybody with an IQ below 100 is not necessarily and idiot. Some are, but some are just below average.

And for those people it makes sense to do what people always did. It's called being conservative.

People who are smarted have at easier to understand new concepts and they have the option to be "progressive".

Obviously smart people can still be conservative. Why not?

 

And, in case you missed it, this whole thread is not about progressives vs. conservatives. It's about Trump, who is obviously not a traditional conservative. And that should be obvious to anyone who understands the concept of conservatism. 

 

 

Conservatism is NOT easy to understand. Read the Road to Serfdom and tell me if that's easy reading. If you want to truly understand conservative principles it's actually a highly intellectual exercise.

 

What "new concepts" do you think Harris voters understand which Trump voters don't understand? It's preposterous.

 

I think Jordan Peterson often gets it right, but on this one he's a bit off.

 

And Trump is very obviously a conservative, he wants to conserve the ethnic make up of America, he wants to save US industry, he wants moderation on abortion, how is Trump not a conversative?

[Yellowtail]

5 minutes ago, BusyB said:

 

Interesting. You're right - he's anything but traditional conservative. Though he is dangerously anti-progressive (for want of a better contrast word).

 

I've not really tried to pigeonhole him politically. His creed is money and greed. He seems to stand for no other policy than his own aggrandizement.

 

He is also clearly coming off the rails and unfit. However, it's way too late for the Reps to switch the ticket to a younger generation the way the Dems did. So they're gonna try and heave him into office at any cost, then retire him a year or so in to replace him with Vance.

 

Then the US can really look in for some serious faeces.

 

 

 

That he is anti-progressive is what makes him attractive to people that do not want their communities overrun with illegal aliens that benefit the rich at the expense of the poor. 

[transam]

53 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

No, it doesn't. Trump followers are not idiots. 

 

Conservatives are not idiots.

 

Friedrich Hayek was a conservative and he was intellectually more gifted than any Kamala Harris voter ever will be.

You obviously don't watch vids of Trump voters being buried when interviewed, but as you are a Putin supporter, I expect posts like yours.........🤭

[riclag]

7 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Nah, it's about keeping Harris out of the W H. There is no knowing how bad she will be if she wins, as she has no track record of leadership, but IMO there is no way she's going to be good for the US and the free world. Every time she opens her mouth she exposes the reason to keep her out of the W H.

Doesnt she sound like those extreme left judges during questioning at congressional committee hearings ?

 

“When Baier pressed her on whether she would advocate for taxpayer funding for transgender surgeries, she said, “I would follow the law.” She added that the Trump ads are an effort to “try to create a sense of fear in the voters.”

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4937802-kamala-harris-bret-baier-interview-takeaways/

Edited October 18 by riclag

[Yellowtail]

1 minute ago, riclag said:

Doesnt she sound like those extreme left judges during questioning at congressional committee hearings ?

 

“When Baier pressed her on whether she would advocate for taxpayer funding for transgender surgeries, she said, “I would follow the law.” She added that the Trump ads are an effort to “try to create a sense of fear in the voters.”

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4937802-kamala-harris-bret-baier-interview-takeaways/

She'll "follow the law", while "her" administration does all they can to circumvent the law...

[flexomike]

3 hours ago, FritsSikkink said:

KKK?

No wars? During Trump your country was bombing at least 5 countries.

KKK was a Democrat group of thugs.

[BusyB]

12 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

Well, you have to look at the substance, not the dust jacket.

 

Trump seems a bona fide right wing nationalist, and nationalists are always conservative.

 

Of course Trump is conservative, he wants to conserve the non-hispanic, non-black make up of the US with his anti-immigration policy, he wants to save US industry with tariffs, abortion moderation, how is he NOT conservative?

 

 

 

Well he's certainly not the 'One Nation' Conservative (admittedly European)  Bubblegum was referring to.

 

He is more the last gasp of an entitled white rule establishment which is becoming a minority and losing its hitherto guaranteed grip on power. He's already talking about the 'enemy within' and using the military to deal with 'Marxists' like Kamala Harris who is a terrifying mixed race candidate and competitor to him and his like. So in a sense, he is a conservative in trying to maintain a status quo.

 

And millions of terrified white Americans facing the same dilemma think he's on their side because they buy his lies. 

 

He's not.

 

Actually I have far more confidence in the US military's oath to the constitution than Trump obviously has. He thinks as CiC it's an oath to him. It's not. As not only Milley has demonstrated. I worked for the US military at a variety of levels on pretty wide ranging and large scale tasks for two years, so I have a pretty good feel for them at all levels. But then again you never know how people who've been drilled to take orders unquestionably might react.

 

The problem facing the US is that if the conservative candidate for the Presidency hadn't inherited a fortune from his unsavory forbears he would currently be sitting at the bad end of a trailer park raging degenerately at the traffic going by outside. That is to do with his character, personality and ability, none of which he impresses anyone with. He has failed publicly in all those areas and could never have worked his way up as in the 'American Dream'.

 

In fact he is the glaring opposite of said dream. He represents not preservation of the status quo - he is the apotheosis of the descent into a barbarous, destructive dystopia. If you give him a second chance.

 

Don't go back!