Archive

Tag Archives: Trump

Republican U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump refers to former Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney, who lost the 2012 presidential election, as a "choker" at a rally with supporters in Anaheim, California, U.S., May 25, 2016. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst - RTSFXMO

Trump is now choking on his own words and behavior

As his conduct becomes more erratic and alarming by the day, to win the presidential race, Donald Trump really needs a time-out to reconsider his overall campaign strategy.

Trump’s strategy of “All Press Is Good Press” might have worked fine during the primaries but it is not working for him in this election.

The way he is going now, there is no way Trump can win this election.

JMD

Owner of Bunkumless.com and King Global Earth and Environmental Sciences Corporation, JMD, a former attorney, is a Columnist for The Futurist Daily News and editor of the Social and Political Blog JMDlive.com  Follow JMD @ jmdlive

 

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Political Correctness

My latest painting

“Make America Great Again” Because no matter what is in your pants, you can still be a big prick. – Illma Gore

“Political correctness” is a term describing language, policies and measures intended not to offend or disadvantage any particular group of people in a community or society. As Clint Eastwood would say, “We now live in a pussy generation” where if you say the wrong thing, you may be penalized, lose your job or even taken to court.

Every single day, media bombards us with subtle messages about what we should believe and what appropriate speech consists of. Most of the time, most of us quietly fall in line with this unwritten speech code. Those that would dare to buck the system are finding out that the consequences can be rather severe and the younger generation is particularly susceptible to this media’s power of suggestion and when we, the people go to work or go to school, the conversations that we have with others are mostly based on content that the media feeds us.

The media is not the only source that is telling us what to think. The messaging that comes from all of our major institutions either governmental, social or educational is remarkably consistent. The establishment have a relentless propaganda machine that never stops working, trying to control what we say and how we think or how we should think. Freethinkers are now a rare breed and understanding what is being done to us is the first step toward breaking free. The way that we all see the world today has been greatly shaped by the thousands of hours of thought training and indoctrination that we have all received over the years.

The Trump Factor

Again, as Clint Eastwood would say, “Anyone offended by Donald Trump’s so-called racist remarks attitude and language should just fucking get over it.”

Trump is onto something because he is only plainly and simply saying what is on his mind. Sometimes it is not so good and sometimes it is exactly what most people mean and, personally, I can definitely understand where he is coming from. You may not always agree with Trump but you will have to agree with me that he does not have to agree with you or anybody else.

Saying that a judge is prejudicial or bias because of his descent is definitely a dumb thing to say but that does not mean that you are racist. Saying that a specific individual of a specific descent may be prejudicial or detrimental to you because of your previously expressed opinions is a totally different story and has nothing to do with racism. Saying that one is a racist or a bigot because he is saying that we shall limit all Muslim entries in a country, saying that all illegal immigrants shall be deported out of a country if they do not comply with the immigration laws… Come on! This is only common sense; this is in no way racism or bigotry.

In the sixties my mother, like many thousand others, had to sign for and endorse my father, an illegal American immigrant to Canada were he has been working and paying taxes for more than 10 years. My father had to reluctantly kneel in front of the queen and kiss her ass in order to stay in Canada and provide for his family. Does that mean that the Canadian are racists? Come on, like my father, just get the fuck over it! Immigration laws are for everyone including those, like my father, that originally did not comply and started a family in a foreign land.

Saying that there should be a stringent vetting system for all immigrants and refugees, especially for those coming from proselytized countries in any way of form… Come on! This is only common sense; you want to come and live in my house, you have to live according to the rules of my house. When I go to Rome, I dress and eat like the Romans. I know how to show respect! Do you really believe that Donald J. Trump is the only person in the world that is really fed up with the illegal immigrants, Islamic people and refugees of all breed? Come on; wake up! Look around: Trump is only saying out loud what millions of people are thinking all around the world. Trump may well have small hands but he definitely has big cojones.

Too much ass kissing and not enough ass kicking!

Secretly or privately, everybody is getting tired of political correctness and kissing up asses. We live in a kiss ass generation. We are in it right now and it is a very sad story. Everybody’s walking on eggshells. People are accusing people of being racist, being bigot, being atheist, being birther, being whatever. People are blaming everyone except themselves for their own misery, their condition and the way they live. Come on, get over it! Man up! When I grew up, those things were not happening. We were not happy with our live, we were doing something about it. Instead of complaining about them and moaning like a child, we knew how to deal with assholes and abusers of all kinds. When we saw snakes, we were not having a meeting about it; we killed snakes!

Personally, I do believe that our planet should be a global village without any kind of frontier, territorial, economical or geographical. I do believe in a world where everybody should live according to one and only one rule: The Golden rule! Evidently, humanity being what it is now, this is not tomorrow the day.

We all live in a kiss ass generation!

All across the world, some, especially the pundits and the media would say and insist that Trump is inciting political violence, that he is a serial liar, a rampant xenophobe and all these other things. I am certainly not to discuss all these issues. It would be losing my time: people only hear what they want to hear. People do not want to hear the truth, they only want you to confirm what they perceive as being the truth. To all of you, owner of the only and holy truth, I would say only a few things: Wake up kiddos! Just get over it! Open your eyes! Finally, after decades of stifling political economical and religious correctness norms, millions have found their voices and it is not a pretty sound.

Like it or not, around the world, millions of people want to do that same thing: speak their minds without fear of being shushed and shamed for being politically or otherwise incorrect. More and more people are now feeling free to talk about what is really on their minds, with no filter between their brain and their mouth, regarding issues related to race, ethnicity, race, culture, gender, religion, sexuality and other sensitive topics. More and more people are now feeling free to share their feelings, their fears, their resentments, their hopes, their anxieties, their prejudices, their values and beliefs. More and more people are now having an open discussion about what we really think and feel.

How are we ever going to have authentic, meaningful conversations about sensitive issues of race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, cultural difference and values if we cannot talk about what is really on our minds? How can we build bridges of understanding if we cannot speak openly? Are we really so fragile, so sensitive, that we cannot bear to hear someone else speak their truth, even if that truth is painful to hear? Do we really need to be protected from each other’s perceptions, fears, anger and resentment? Are our feelings so delicate that we cannot bear to listen to the pain, confusion, and frustration that other carry in their hearts?

We will never rid of the world prejudices or biases, racism, sexism, bigotry, and xenophobia by prohibiting uncomfortable, painful conversations. For decades, social, religious and political correctness proponents of all kinds and breeds have said: “Never share your true feelings and thoughts, especially if they are negative. Political correctness has a down side, and we are all seeing it big time. By not allowing people to speak of their fear of others, their financial and social anxiety, their despair about the future, we have failed to deal with the chronic, soul-crushing pain that millions have been feeling for a long time.

The Trump Factor Revisited

Today, unseen before, a politician is making it OK for people to talk about what is really on their minds with no filter between their brain and their mouth. Donald J. Trump, even if it may cost him dearly, does not self-censor and that is one of the things that is appealing to his admirers.

It is about a year ago that Donald Trump stormed onto the political scene.

Those who regularly and constantly advocate political correctness are motivated primarily by either their own personal concerns or by the emotional wellbeing of their ostensibly vulnerable minority community. Their concerns have nothing to do with the general or national interest of a global population and I tend to agree with Trump when he says: “I think the big problem this country has is being politically correct. I’ve been challenged by so many people, and I Do not frankly have time for total political correctness. And to be honest with you, this country [or any other in the world as a matter of fact], does not have time either.”

Many had and still have concerns about Trump. They questioned and are still questioning whether someone with such cutting yet candid honesty, a candidate who veered so sharply from so many of the usual political expectations, could ever become president. Rather than backing down, Trump is still pushing forward.

Today, political correctness with peer-engendered public shaming is now the social reality and there is a contingency of people and pundits that seek not just to diminish alternate viewpoints, but to repress them altogether. It is this kind of mindset, the hostile advocacy of platitudes over polite dissent, dictatorial silencing over thoughtful engagement and censorship over free interchange, that took many from reticent acceptance of Trump’s approach to passionate advocacy. 

Yet it is his honest advocacy for his deeply held beliefs that has emboldened many to speak out confidently for their positions, and to ignore the anonymous attacks and scoffing jeers of the naysayers.

Trump has set and is still setting the politically correct walls aflame.

JMD

JMD is an enthusiastic private and public events speaker, writer, syndicated columnist and social activist who most enjoys evolving in complex interactive situations.

jmdlive@live.ca

http://bunkumless.com

http://jmdonline.tumblr.com/

http://lefuturistedailynews.com/

http://news.thefuturistdailynews.com/

https://about.me/jmdlive/

Trump will win the nomination

Against all odds, Trump is on course to wrap up the Republican nomination

As I predicted months ago, Trump is going to be the Republican nominee.

His clear victory in New York on Tuesday April 19 saw him add to previous victories across the South on ‘Super Tuesday’ and in the key states of Florida, Illinois, Arizona and Missouri.

It was already fairly clear he would win the most votes and delegates in New York and the game is now whether he can win a majority of delegates before the July 18-21 Cleveland Republican Convention. A total of 1,237 delegates is required to win the nomination.

Today, with just under 850 delegates on his side, Trump has now won nearly 70 per cent of the delegates he needs to secure the Republican nomination. His closest competitor, Ted Cruz, has not even secure 45 per cent of the 1,237 candidates he would need to win the nomination.

How Trump will secure the Republican nomination

Trump has just fewer than 850 delegates and is about 390 short of the magical number to secure the Republican nomination.

Next Tuesday, April 26, he is set to win around 100 more delegates in Maryland, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Delaware and Pennsylvania.

That would take him to nearly 950 delegates with the possibility of 50 more delegates supporting him if the 50 unbound Pennsylvanian delegates decide to support him.

Then comes the critical state of Indiana on May 3, which uniquely awards all of its 57 delegates to the statewide winner.

If Trump wins Indiana, he will be the republican nominee.

If he does not, considering that he should pick up another 50 delegates in West Virginia, Oregon and Washington in the rest of May, and then sweep all 50 of New Jersey’s while winning 10 in New Mexico on June 7, he still has a very good chance.

That would give him 1,060 if he has not won Indiana or any of Philadelphia’s unbound delegates, and somewhere between 1,100 and 1,150 if he has.

It will all come down to California

California’s 172 delegates will also be in play on June 7.

If Trump wins Indiana and the support of a significant chunk of Philadelphia’s delegates, he could clinch the nomination that day.

Trump is expected to win at least half of California’s 172 and there is a clear possibility that he may win more.

If Trump loses Indiana, he will still end the primary season within 100 delegates of securing the nomination. He will still have 90-95 per cent of the delegates he needs to win the nomination and will just need to win over some of the 200 or so uncommitted delegates to vote on the floor of the Republican convention to be held in July.

The closer Trump gets to 1,237, the more likely these uncommitted delegates will push him over the line.

In other words, the 2016 race is almost certainly going to be Trump vs Clinton.

In such a scenario, the betting markets give Clinton a 72 percent chance to win the Presidential race. Can Trump bridge the gap?

He has six and a half months to defy the odds.

JMD

JMD is an enthusiastic private and public events speaker, writer, syndicated columnist and social activist who most enjoys evolving in complex interactive situations.

jmdlive@live.ca

http://jmdonline.tumblr.com/

http://lefuturistedailynews.com/

http://news.thefuturistdailynews.com/

https://about.me/jmdlive/

 

social-media

Social networks are out to be more encompassing and controlling, more totalizing, than earlier media ever was.

Emotional appeals can be good for politics. They can spur civic involvement and they can galvanize public attention, focusing it on injustices and abuses of power. But there’s a dark side to social media’s emotionalism. Trump’s popularity took off only after, playing to the public’s frustrations and fears, demonizing Mexican immigrants and it worked.

The fact that experienced politicians are having trouble fitting themselves into the new mold is not unusual. Whenever a new medium upends the game, veteran politicians struggle. They go on playing by the old medium’s rules. They continue to follow the conventions of broadcast TV. They assume that television will establish the campaign’s talking points, package the race as a series of tidy stories and shape the way voters see the contestants. They may have teams of digital representatives tending to their online messaging, but they still view social media as a complement to TV coverage, a means of reinforcing their messages and images, rather than as the campaign’s driving force.

News organizations, too, tend to be slow to adapt to the arrival of a new medium. In the past, television, gave a theatrical rhythm to political campaigns. Each day was an act in a broader drama. Political campaigns were “narratives,” they had “story lines.” Social media is different. There is no narrative; there is no story line. There is no context. As a result, today’s political campaign reports are often out of sync with the public’s opinion and reaction and to events.

As an example, In July 2015, when Trump kicked dirt on John McCain’s reputation saying, “He’s not a war hero, I like people who weren’t captured,” in print and on TV, this comment received ample saturation coverage, but the narrative never advanced and far from apologizing, Trump kept attacking. While the tweets piled up, the public’s attention buzzed to newer things, and the story died even before it became a story. With Social media, we are entering a post-narrative world of campaigning greatly circumscribing and overtaking the power of traditional media in stage-managing political races.

Rather than narrating stories, newscasters are now reading tweets.

The Internet was intended as a participative tool, as a force for democratization. Early digital enthusiasts expected that the web would engender a deeper national conversation. This was absolutely wishful thinking and daydreaming. Already in the early days of the Social networks there were signs that online media were to promote and encourage a restless mob mentality. People were skimming headlines and posts, seeking information to reinforce their biases while rejecting any contrary perspectives and viewpoints contradicting their opinions. Even today and more ever than ever, public information gathering is still further tribalistic than pluralistic. Blog authors and blog readers, even more than ever, are now exclusively gravitating toward digital content that will reinforce their biases, their opinions and convictions. Originally intended to be a force for participation and democratization, the Internet is now the perfect tool for discrimination, segregation and ghettoization.

If there is one thing that the Internet achieved and Social media reinforced, it is the polarizing effect that broadcast media, particularly talk radio and cable news, had been having for many years. Today, Social media is turning out to be more encompassing and controlling, more totalizing, than earlier media ever was. Today, social networks like Facebook, Twitter and Google do not only regulate the messages people receive, they also regulate their responses thus seriously influencing public opinion.

Social networks and media are now shaping the forms of our discourse.

Facebook feeds us with a cascade of messages selected by their News Feed algorithm, and we are provided with a set of prescribed ways to react to each one of these messages. We can click a Like button; share the message with our friends or comment. On Twitter, we can either reply, retweet or favorite and, any thought we express has to fit a tight text limit. Google News also presents us a series of headlines underlining the latest trending stories. It then provides a row of buttons for sharing the headlines either on Google Plus, Twitter or Facebook.

All social networks without exception are now imposing these formal constraints and limitations on what we see, what we read and on how we can respond, none of these restrictions having anything to do with promoting public interest. All these constraints and limitations only reflect the commercial interests of the companies and service providers operating the Social network as well as the specific protocols of their software programming. While the systematic formulaic quality of the Social media is well suited to the chitchat and gossiping that takes place among friends, when applied to politics and the political speech, these same constraints are nothing else than pernicious, inspiring insignificance rather than wisdom and enlightenment.

MD

JMD is an enthusiastic writer, columnist and social activist who most enjoys evolving in complex interactive situations.

jmdlive@live.ca

http://jmdonline.tumblr.com/

http://lefuturistedailynews.com/

http://news.thefuturistdailynews.com/

https://about.me/jmdlive/