A snippet about Trump and his supporters that I found telling

The whole article is here: http://www.aljazeera.com/blogs/americas/2016/03/super-tuesday-rise-donald-trump-160301163629401.html


But this is the part I wanted to discuss, and what I've been trying to says
It's the no-bullshit, blunt, in-your-face, no-PC crap......that I think, people (rightly or wrongly,) have responded to.

Here is the snippet:

..."For many of Trump's supporters, the past eight years have brought massive changes: there is a black man in the White House; gay marriage has been legalised; and a form or universal healthcare has been introduced.

One columnist in Houston, Cory Garcia, argues that Trump is the best thing to happen to American politics, believing the businessman has exposed a dark underbelly.

Sitting in a conference room at his weekly paper, The Houston Press, he told me: "Donald Trump is the answer to, I think, a lot of Republican questions about 'what would happen if we were just honest? What if we didn't beat around the bush about race, or immigration, or terrorism? What if we just said what we meant? Like, would we be punished for that? Would people be, would we be isolated, would we be marginalised? And the answer is, at least to Republican voters, no.'"
For Trump, there is no coded language, no hidden message, no dog whistles that only Republicans understand.

It's all there, on show and the people respect his blunt, unvarnished presentation. He doesn't care who he upsets.

And the people have responded with support and more importantly, votes.

The Republican establishment thought Trump's campaign would fall apart. He didn't have the discipline. He didn't have the organisation.

Now, they are deeply worried he will be the party's standard bearer in November's presidential election.

And after Super Tuesday, that is more likely than not.

Source: Al Jazeera



IMO this is what made Farage and to a lesser extent, Clegg (wnich is what won his party enough seats) more popular with voters.
People are sick of that polished plastic-speak.

If only Trump stood for something of value and worth he might be a pretty good president.

Trump is also switching his stances a lot. I wonder if at this point anything could derail him on the way to the GOP nomination, though -- maybe if he made out with Barack Obama?

I do think that when someone is blatently honest and says the stuff that a lot of people want to say but "can't" - well it kind of makes them attractive to listen to.

That's why I said if he stood for something beautiful - he'd be an asset not a monster.

I can only explain it this way:
In our house nothing is out of bounds to laugh at or say. We are very non-PC and it works for us all as a family and as people.

My son is so well-rounded and individual. He has always had both sides of S situation because that is how you decide what you think about the world.

eddie wrote:I do think that when someone is blatently honest and says the stuff that a lot of people want to say but "can't" - well it kind of makes them attractive to listen to.

That's why I said if he stood for something beautiful - he'd be an asset not a monster.

The reason for the popularity, but along with all the sudden reactions, is that what "a lot of people want to say but 'can't" is false, immature rubbish.  It's the product of lighter thinking, which explains why Trump is over on the Republican side.  There's a lot of that over there.  

As John Stuart Mill said: I didn't say Conservatives are stupid; I said stupid people are generally conservative!

I think you're narrow minded Quill, and it's really immature to lump groups of people together.

If Trump is saying what a lot of people want to but daren't, the human race doesn't deserve to survive.

Yes you may be right there sassy, but like i said, I'm focusing on the way he speaks and not what he says.

If he had something postitve and beautiful to bring to the worlds table....we'd be celebrating him.

I guess I'd rather be condemned as "having bad opinions" than a "liar"

Compare Trump to Cameron.

eddie wrote:I think you're narrow minded Quill, and it's really immature to lump groups of people together.

Unfortunately, it's the nature of the game.  People lump themselves into groups...all that's left for us to do is judge.  And politics is nothing if not about judgment.

Trump calls himself a Republican.  He's running in the Republican primaries.  So, there you go, he's lumping himself.

Then...he's appealing to the basest of instincts, the instincts of the lower, most unthinking part of the population, fueled by drunkenness, inability to read, and frankly...intellectually laziness.  These were the 'D' students in school, those who probably shouldn't be allowed to vote...but it's politically incorrect to say that.

eddie wrote:Yes you may be right there sassy, but like i said, I'm focusing on the way he speaks and not what he says.

If he had something postitve and beautiful to bring to the worlds table....we'd be celebrating him.  

Obviously. What kind of a conclusion is that? If god were good, he wouldn't be bad!?

sassy wrote:If Trump is saying what a lot of people want to but daren't, the human race doesn't deserve to survive.

Vote 1 skynet

Trump reminds me of a Bond villain.

DID Donald Trump really just do that?
The comparisons between the Republican presidential frontrunner and fascist dictator Adolf Hitler came disturbingly close on Saturday when Trump asked his supporters to raise their right hands and make a “pledge”.
As the supporters around Trump dutifully followed his request, the scene recalled images of Hitler’s infamous Nazi salute.

http://www.news.com.au/world/north-america/donald-trump-gets-a-walloping-from-ted-cruz/news-story/969788ec00717bccafba2ab8c3219599

Original Quill wrote:

eddie wrote:I think you're narrow minded Quill, and it's really immature to lump groups of people together.

Unfortunately, it's the nature of the game.  People lump themselves into groups...all that's left for us to do is judge.  And politics is nothing if not about judgment.

Trump calls himself a Republican.  He's running in the Republican primaries.  So, there you go, he's lumping himself.

Then...he's appealing to the basest of instincts, the instincts of the lower, most unthinking part of the population, fueled by drunkenness, inability to read, and frankly...intellectually laziness.  These were the 'D' students in school, those who probably shouldn't be allowed to vote...but it's politically incorrect to say that.

Hahahahahaha Are those facts or your opinion about those people????

Careful quill, you,sound like.......???

Original Quill wrote:

eddie wrote:Yes you may be right there sassy, but like i said, I'm focusing on the way he speaks and not what he says.

If he had something postitve and beautiful to bring to the worlds table....we'd be celebrating him.  

Obviously.  What kind of a conclusion is that?  If god were good, he wouldn't be bad!?

Erm. No.
Genuinely confused.

Quill,your debating skills actually suck!!

If he stood for something beautiful he wouldn't be the meglomaniac he is and he wouldn't attract the dregs of humanify.

eddie wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Unfortunately, it's the nature of the game.  People lump themselves into groups...all that's left for us to do is judge.  And politics is nothing if not about judgment.

Trump calls himself a Republican.  He's running in the Republican primaries.  So, there you go, he's lumping himself.

Then...he's appealing to the basest of instincts, the instincts of the lower, most unthinking part of the population, fueled by drunkenness, inability to read, and frankly...intellectually laziness.  These were the 'D' students in school, those who probably shouldn't be allowed to vote...but it's politically incorrect to say that.

Hahahahahaha Are those facts or your opinion about those people????

Careful quill, you,sound like.......???

A bit of both, I'd say. The factual part is in proving that Trump lies. All Mexicans are criminals? Drug dealers? Women are angry menstruators? Prisoners-of-war are losers?

The part about drunkenness and intellectual laziness are from many evenings in the pub, listening to the same pontificate about politics. They are loud and repetitive, just before the fall off the bar stool.

That I would rather they didn't vote...well, that's personal narrative.

eddie wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Obviously.  What kind of a conclusion is that?  If god were good, he wouldn't be bad!?

Erm. No.
Genuinely confused.

Quill,your debating skills actually suck!!

Coming from a conservative, that's a compliment.

Original Quill wrote:

eddie wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Obviously.  What kind of a conclusion is that?  If god were good, he wouldn't be bad!?

Erm. No.
Genuinely confused.

Quill,your debating skills actually suck!!

Coming from a conservative, that's a compliment.

Weird that. I've never voted conservative in my life.
You judge people without knowing them. Why would you do that?

Original Quill wrote:

eddie wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Unfortunately, it's the nature of the game.  People lump themselves into groups...all that's left for us to do is judge.  And politics is nothing if not about judgment.

Trump calls himself a Republican.  He's running in the Republican primaries.  So, there you go, he's lumping himself.

Then...he's appealing to the basest of instincts, the instincts of the lower, most unthinking part of the population, fueled by drunkenness, inability to read, and frankly...intellectually laziness.  These were the 'D' students in school, those who probably shouldn't be allowed to vote...but it's politically incorrect to say that.

Hahahahahaha Are those facts or your opinion about those people????

Careful quill, you,sound like.......???

A bit of both, I'd say.  The factual part is in proving that Trump lies.  All Mexicans are criminals?  Drug dealers?  Women are angry menstruators?  Prisoners-of-war are losers?

The part about drunkenness and intellectual laziness are from many evenings in the pub, listening to the same pontificate about politics.  They are loud and repetitive, just before the fall off the bar stool.

That I would rather they didn't vote...well, that's personal narrative.

Let's answer the first part of your post:

"All republicans are stupid."

That's what you said, yes?
The factual part is that your statement is a lie.

God, how did you ever, ever, pass a law exam??????

New York Daily News front page tomorrow:

Well a lot of people followed Hitler and bought into his "dream"
Let's hope that the same isn't true of Trump.
But don't bank on it.

I'm not Eds, I think it Trump gets in we'll go to hell in a hardcart, and the person pushing it will be running.

It will certainly be a very bad move for the world.
And I dont say that lightly.

eddie wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

A bit of both, I'd say.  The factual part is in proving that Trump lies.  All Mexicans are criminals?  Drug dealers?  Women are angry menstruators?  Prisoners-of-war are losers?

The part about drunkenness and intellectual laziness are from many evenings in the pub, listening to the same pontificate about politics.  They are loud and repetitive, just before the fall off the bar stool.

That I would rather they didn't vote...well, that's personal narrative.

Let's answer the first part of your post:

"All republicans are stupid."

That's what you said, yes?
The factual  part is that your statement is a lie.

God, how did you ever, ever, pass a law exam??????

Indeed Abraham Lincoln was a Republican

That was when many Democrats voted against the abolition of slavery

eddie wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Coming from a conservative, that's a compliment.

Weird that. I've never voted conservative in my life.
You judge people without knowing them. Why would you do that?

Because of the way you frame your political views. You see the world in conservative terms...well, on most issues.

Original Quill wrote:

eddie wrote:

Weird that. I've never voted conservative in my life.
You judge people without knowing them. Why would you do that?

Because of the way you frame your political views.  You see the world in conservative terms...well, on most issues.

Actually most of her social views lean to the left

She supports gay rights
Women rights
Equality for Blacks, Asians etc


So again your views are based on a prejudice you hold of the poster and not her views

Didge wrote:

eddie wrote:


Let's answer the first part of your post:

"All republicans are stupid."

That's what you said, yes?
The factual  part is that your statement is a lie.

God, how did you ever, ever, pass a law exam??????

Indeed Abraham Lincoln was a Republican

That was when many Democrats voted against the abolition of slavery

Yes.  The Democratic Party was staunchly pro-slavery, and deeply southern when Lincoln switched from Whit to Republican.

The evolution of the Republican Party into a conservative interest group came from its NE mercantile and industrial roots, the graft in the late-18th Century, and the Progressive Party pulling most of the people-who-care-about-people away from the Republican Party.  The circle was complete when Lee Atwater introduced the southern strategy into Republican Party.

Converesly, the Democratic Party became the caring party out of the populist movement, stripped of the slavery issue, and the incorporation of many of Teddy Roosevelt's progressives in the 1920's.  The 1964 Civil Rights Act, under a Democratic leader, prompted the southern strategy of Lee Atwater.  Once again, that cemented the circle for Republicans.

eddie wrote:Well a lot of people followed Hitler and bought into his "dream"
Let's hope that the same isn't true of Trump.
But don't bank on it.

36% of the German voting population supposedly voted for Hitler's party...
It only needs three people to be standing in a "First past the post" election, for 34% to carry the day if the other two candidates get 33% each..
If a "Preferential voting" system is used, the winner will normally receive a minimum of 50%plus1 votes, in the final count-off.

Obviuosly, both systems can be manipulated if one or both major sides stoop to using fake minor parties and 'sock puppets' to skewer the voting patterns..

Over in the USA, pre-poll surveys showed that well over 50% of voters aimed to vote Democrat in November, whereas only 28% wanted the Repub's...   Something will have to go seriously wrong for the Democrats, for the GOP candidate to win the Presidential election this year..

The odds are still overwhelming that Hillary Clinton will be the next POTUS.

Didge wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Because of the way you frame your political views.  You see the world in conservative terms...well, on most issues.

Actually most of her social views lean to the left

She supports gay rights
Women rights
Equality for Blacks, Asians etc


So again your views are based on a prejudice you hold of the poster and not her views

There are lot of members of the Republican Party in the US, and the Liberal Party down here in Oz - both parties staunchly 'conservative' in their economic and poltical policies, and both with extremist "Tea Party" factions - who also hold such left-leaning social policies as eddie...

Within their respective parties, such members with softer economic views and gentler social outlooks are usually referred to as "Wets"; while those with harsher and more 'laissez faire' attitudes are labelled as "economic Dries"..

To be fair, there are several Brits on this forum who consistantly label themselves as lefties and liberals, but realistically simply wouldn't "cut the mustard" as genuine 'Lefties' over here.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Didge wrote:


Actually most of her social views lean to the left

She supports gay rights
Women rights
Equality for Blacks, Asians etc


So again your views are based on a prejudice you hold of the poster and not her views

There are lot of members of the Republican Party in the US, and the Liberal Party down here in Oz - both parties staunchly 'conservative' in their economic and poltical policies, and both with extremist "Tea Party" factions - who also hold such left-leaning social policies as eddie...

Within their respective parties, such members with softer economic views and gentler social outlooks are usually referred to as "Wets"; while those with harsher and more 'laissez faire' attitudes are labelled as "economic Dries"..

To be fair, there are several Brits on this forum who consistantly label themselves as lefties and liberals, but realistically simply wouldn't "cut the mustard" as genuine 'Lefties' over here.

Exactly. And that's not to knock the Brits in any way. It's just that the median point by which the label is used is different.

To their great credit, I think the day is long gone when anyone in the UK is going to call himself anti-gay, anti-women or anti-black. So it's pretty much the norm. The conservatism is seen in the reflex framing that conservatives give to any question arising...the latest example being the attitude toward Muslims and the exodus from Syria. But other examples are there as well.

I don't have any attitude toward Muslims or genuine refugees,

It's the economic migrants who ride upon the backs of genuine refugees and who come and take the absolute flagrant piss, who I am against.

eddie wrote:I don't have any attitude toward Muslims or genuine refugees,

It's the economic migrants who ride upon the backs of genuine refugees and who come and take the absolute flagrant piss, who I am against.

Always in the periphery there has got to be something.  That's the way a bias works.  "Yeah, but's..." and "With the exception of..." followed by the real political view,  

Eg: "I always liked black people...but just as long as they keep their grubby hands off our pretty, white girls..."   Just an example to illustrate the point...not saying that's you, today.  It's reduction of cognitive dissonance that causes us to sanitize our prejudices.  But scat with a ribbon and perfume, is still scat.

Donald Trump doesn't tell the truth, he says what he thinks racists want to hear, and so is just like any other politician.

He has been for and against universal healthcare.
He has been pro life and pro choice.
He has been for LGBT equality and against it (depends on the state he's in).

He doesn't explain how he will do the things he says:
The Mexicans will pay for the wall 'because I said they will'.
The army will kill the families of terrorists 'because they won't say no to me'.

He has employed illegal immigrants and scammed thousands of well intentioned young people out of thousands of dollars with his fraudulent 'universities'.

On an internationally broadcast presidential debate the first thing he deemed it relevant to mention was the size of his penis.

Even if he agreed with liberal or 'beautiful' ideas, he would be an arsehole and a liability.

He is a bigot, a liar, a bully and a simpleton.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Didge wrote:


Actually most of her social views lean to the left

She supports gay rights
Women rights
Equality for Blacks, Asians etc


So again your views are based on a prejudice you hold of the poster and not her views

There are lot of members of the Republican Party in the US, and the Liberal Party down here in Oz - both parties staunchly 'conservative' in their economic and poltical policies, and both with extremist "Tea Party" factions - who also hold such left-leaning social policies as eddie...

Within their respective parties, such members with softer economic views and gentler social outlooks are usually referred to as "Wets"; while those with harsher and more 'laissez faire' attitudes are labelled as "economic Dries"..

To be fair, there are several Brits on this forum who consistantly label themselves as lefties and liberals, but realistically simply wouldn't "cut the mustard" as genuine 'Lefties' over here.

Thank goodness for that

It would be the ultimate insult to be labeled alongside any leftist regressive

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:


Indeed Abraham Lincoln was a Republican

That was when many Democrats voted against the abolition of slavery

Yes.  The Democratic Party was staunchly pro-slavery, and deeply southern when Lincoln switched from Whit to Republican.

The evolution of the Republican Party into a conservative interest group came from its NE mercantile and industrial roots, the graft in the late-18th Century, and the Progressive Party pulling most of the people-who-care-about-people away from the Republican Party.  The circle was complete when Lee Atwater introduced the southern strategy into Republican Party.

Converesly, the Democratic Party became the caring party out of the populist movement, stripped of the slavery issue, and the incorporation of many of Teddy Roosevelt's progressives in the 1920's.  The 1964 Civil Rights Act, under a Democratic leader, prompted the southern strategy of Lee Atwater.  Once again, that cemented the circle for Republicans.

But there you go, they were Republicans which shows views change and can change again over time

Your regressive stereotypes are as bad as racists and homophobes themselves as they are based on a poor flawed hate you have where you wrongly associate and label a whole group of political supporters who's views variy widely
The democrats are as much idiots as the Republicans. I mean it is the 21st century and racism is still rife in the US because of its Republic state system. Its central Government is not worth the paper its written on. Poverty is rife and unlike the uk which has a universal health service. The US is formed from some backward white middle class caste system.

Nothing to write home about

Eilzel wrote:Donald Trump doesn't tell the truth, he says what he thinks racists want to hear, and so is just like any other politician.
He has been for and against universal healthcare.
He has been pro life and pro choice.
He has been for LGBT equality and against it (depends on the state he's in).
He doesn't explain how he will do the things he says:
The Mexicans will pay for the wall 'because I said they will'.
The army will kill the families of terrorists 'because they won't say no to me'.
He has employed illegal immigrants and scammed thousands of well intentioned young people out of thousands of dollars with his fraudulent 'universities'.
On an internationally broadcast presidential debate the first thing he deemed it relevant to mention was the size of his penis.
Even if he agreed with liberal or 'beautiful' ideas, he would be an arsehole and a liability.
He is a bigot, a liar, a bully and a simpleton.

Could not have said it better.

If you actually listen to him (I cant anymore without throwing up or risk breaking the reply) he never answers questions, has no policies and just says buzzwords. He is not entertainment, he is a embarrassment.
Just because you can say something doesn't mean you should. He is a prime example.

Plus have a green thingy

Exactly right, Cass.

I've also noticed that if people cheer something he says, he will repeat that same thing two or three times in a slightly different way.

My personal favourite soundbite was "I'm very well educated, I have lots of words, I have the best words."

For pure entertainment value, that, is gold lol

Eilzel wrote:Exactly right, Cass.

I've also noticed that if people cheer something he says, he will repeat that same thing two or three times in a slightly different way.

My personal favourite soundbite was "I'm very well educated, I have lots of words, I have the best words."

For pure entertainment value, that, is gold lol

He essentially says the same thing over and over just in a different phrases.

I cant laugh anymore Hun. Its beyond a joke.I'm very ashamed of some of my fellow Americans.

The only bright spot at the end of the tunnel is if he gets the nomination then Hillary will steamroller over him. I like some of what Bernie says but a lot if it is impractical and too expensive and wont fly. Also here's hoping that the regular normal GOP will jump to the other side. I have some very hardcore republican family and friends who are outraged although they accept partial blame due to the antics of some of their part leaders and Congressional representatives.

Didge wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Yes.  The Democratic Party was staunchly pro-slavery, and deeply southern when Lincoln switched from Whit to Republican.

The evolution of the Republican Party into a conservative interest group came from its NE mercantile and industrial roots, the graft in the late-18th Century, and the Progressive Party pulling most of the people-who-care-about-people away from the Republican Party.  The circle was complete when Lee Atwater introduced the southern strategy into Republican Party.

Converesly, the Democratic Party became the caring party out of the populist movement, stripped of the slavery issue, and the incorporation of many of Teddy Roosevelt's progressives in the 1920's.  The 1964 Civil Rights Act, under a Democratic leader, prompted the southern strategy of Lee Atwater.  Once again, that cemented the circle for Republicans.

But there you go, they were Republicans which shows views change and can change again over time

Your regressive stereotypes are as bad as racists and homophobes themselves as they are based on a poor flawed hate you have where you wrongly associate and label a whole group of political supporters who's views variy widely
The democrats are as much idiots as the Republicans. I mean it is the 21st century and racism is still rife in the US because of its Republic state system. Its central Government is not worth the paper its written on. Poverty is rife and unlike the uk which has a universal health service. The US is formed from some backward white middle class caste system.

Nothing to write home about

What exactly are you saying? You make no sense.

I find the history of the Republican Party really interesting. You seem preoccupied with judgments. I'm more interested in the ideological trails of both parties.

It is what it is, didge. We all know that America has a racist past and present, and that past has been a part of both the Democratic and Republican Parties. Chrissake, the south was a slave economy until the mid-19th-century. Why bang your head against the barn siding and only repeat yourself? You're not saying anything new.

Eilzel wrote:Exactly right, Cass.

I've also noticed that if people cheer something he says, he will repeat that same thing two or three times in a slightly different way.

My personal favourite soundbite was "I'm very well educated, I have lots of words, I have the best words."

For pure entertainment value, that, is gold lol

There is the Univerity of trump education for ya

a lot of words but no Vocabulary among them

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:


But there you go, they were Republicans which shows views change and can change again over time

Your regressive stereotypes are as bad as racists and homophobes themselves as they are based on a poor flawed hate you have where you wrongly associate and label a whole group of political supporters who's views variy widely
The democrats are as much idiots as the Republicans. I mean it is the 21st century and racism is still rife in the US because of its Republic state system. Its central Government is not worth the paper its written on. Poverty is rife and unlike the uk which has a universal health service. The US is formed from some backward white middle class caste system.

Nothing to write home about

What exactly are you saying?  You make no sense.

I find the history of the Republican Party really interesting.  You seem preoccupied with judgments.  I'm more interested in the ideological trails of both parties.

It is what it is, didge.  We all know that America has a racist past and present, and that past has been a part of both the Democratic and Republican Parties.  Chrissake, the south was a slave economy until the mid-19th-century.  Why bang your head against the barn siding and only repeat yourself?  You're not saying anything new.

No you are more interested in placing labels on people as to youi they are either one entity either being Republican or Democrat and its very backward way to look at anything and is regressive and not in any shape listening to any view but the Democrat view, which is again a problem in many countries politically. This is the reason you are seeing support for Trump because people like you do not listen and if you had of listened, he would never have had this support he gets now. The point that glaringly goes over your head. What I know more than most is studying the rise of the far right in the 1920's and 1030's and how it starting to happen again all because of some who again failed to listen and allowed fear to grow, pushing aside the fears of people. Where instead of listening and treating them with respect and helping dispel fears with reason, you push them away ridiculing them. So the question is why are you and others unable to learn anything from history as its views like yours that pushed people to the far right.

The last thing I want to see happen.

Original Quill wrote:

eddie wrote:I don't have any attitude toward Muslims or genuine refugees,

It's the economic migrants who ride upon the backs of genuine refugees and who come and take the absolute flagrant piss, who I am against.

Always in the periphery there has got to be something.  That's the way a bias works.  "Yeah, but's..." and "With the exception of..." followed by the real political view,  

Eg: "I always liked black people...but just as long as they keep their grubby hands off our pretty, white girls..."   Just an example to illustrate the point...not saying that's you, today.  It's reduction of cognitive dissonance that causes us to sanitize our prejudices.  But scat with a ribbon and perfume, is still scat.

Yes I can agree with that. I am agaisnt any colour or creed taking the piss out of the country I live in Quill.
Amd that includes white, English layabouts.

Didge wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

What exactly are you saying?  You make no sense.

I find the history of the Republican Party really interesting.  You seem preoccupied with judgments.  I'm more interested in the ideological trails of both parties.

It is what it is, didge.  We all know that America has a racist past and present, and that past has been a part of both the Democratic and Republican Parties.  Chrissake, the south was a slave economy until the mid-19th-century.  Why bang your head against the barn siding and only repeat yourself?  You're not saying anything new.

No you are more interested in placing labels on people as to youi they are either one entity either being Republican or Democrat and its very backward way to look at anything and is regressive and not in any shape listening to any view but the Democrat view, which is again a problem in many countries politically. This is the reason you are seeing support for Trump because people like you do not listen and if you had of listened, he would never have had this support he gets now. The point that glaringly goes over your head. What I know more than most is studying the rise of the far right in the 1920's and 1030's and how it starting to happen again all because of some who again failed to listen and allowed fear to grow, pushing aside the fears of people. Where instead of listening and treating them with respect and helping dispel fears with reason, you push them away ridiculing them. So the question is why are you and others unable to learn anything from history as its views like yours that pushed people to the far right.

The last thing I want to see happen.

Didge, no matter what the issue, you always manage to make it personal.

I digress to ask: Have you ever considered therapy? You might find you are your own worst problem.