Donald Trump: America Should Consider "Closing the Internet Up In Some Way" (dailydot.com) 735
Patrick O'Neill writes: Hours after Donald Trump suggested the U.S. ban Muslims from entering the United States, the leading Republican presidential candidate said America should also consider "closing the Internet up in some way" to fight Islamic State terrorists in cyberspace. Trump mocked anyone who would object that his plan might violate the freedom of speech, saying "these are foolish people, we have a lot of foolish people ... We have to go see Bill Gates," Trump said, to better understand the Internet and then possibly "close it up."
Oh the Irony..... (Score:5, Insightful)
Ironic isn't it that Trump wants to kill the very instrument that would be most effective in de-radicalizing people?
Free speech and free flow of information does more good than harm. Seems counter intuitive to lock violent radicals out of the very information that could change their minds, educate the ignorant, and carry a non violent message.
Sure terrorists use the Internet to recruit. But how many people did not join up because of information on the Internet?
Are we really so scared that we will turn proto-fascist?
Re:Oh the Irony..... (Score:5, Insightful)
No, no, no. See, it's not fascist if you only do it to bad people.
I wonder who nutty old Uncle Don will go for next?
Re:Oh the Irony..... (Score:5, Interesting)
You know, I have a theory.
I think Donald came into this thing, as a lark...running for president would get him a lot of attention and when he dropped out after a good showing, he's have more demand for him thereafter on news, etc.
I think, this long term support as nominee has surprised even HIM...who likely didn't want to really be president, just to run and get some "credit"....
I think with his marks in the polls, it is scaring even HIM that he could get the nomination, and therefore...is amping up the "crazy" to be able to get out of being nominated, yet still never have to voluntarily drop out, etc.
I think theres a possibility he got into this never meaning to win...and is maybe scared shitless he might really do it...?
Re:Oh the Irony..... (Score:5, Funny)
So it's like C++ and Scientology - a joke that got out of hand and went too far for the perpetrators to admit it?
That's such a stupid and ridiculous idea that there's absolutely no way ever it isn't true.
We must outlaw thinking (Score:5, Insightful)
Cut to the chase, Trump supporters. Upstream of using the Internet is thinking. Thinking leads to bad thoughts, and bad thoughts lead to bad acts. Our only hope now is to outlaw thinking. Do it now! For the children ...
Re:Oh the Irony..... (Score:5, Insightful)
Even if we were doing a 100% perfect job of upholding our noblest values, we can't expect to win them all; some people actively dislike the best aspects of our civilization; so they will be a tough crowd. For the people who agree that we've got a noble theory; but can only laugh bitterly at the 'liberty and justice for all' part because...price and participation may vary...the further we go into overtly illiberal tactics, the more reasonable their conviction that we are long on talk and short on substance.
Even if we were willing to sacrifice our own freedoms for the alleged benefits, which we shouldn't be; it's not clear how 'liberal democracy' wins the war of ideas by turning to fascism as soon as it starts to get nervous.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Consider the progression (Score:5, Insightful)
And yet you have those rights, which you are apparently willing to die for, because of idealists.
The irony club has beaten you like a baby seal.
Because you cannot beat Trump and maintain our standing in the world (what's left of it) by folding on basic rights, in the face of maniacs.
Re:Consider the progression (Score:4, Interesting)
I absolutely do not support Trump's proposal, but guys like you are precisely the sort of idealists that he will steamroll over without any effort in the public spotlight. Everyone else out there can see that as a matter of fact, the Internet enables terrorist recruitment probably 10x better than broadcast media did in the 60s to late 80s/early 90s.
The way I talk about the Internet is the way most gun rights activists talk about guns. I care more about freedom than security. "If it saves one life" is not an argument to me. I'd rather lose lives in the name of freedom than save lives in the name of security.
In this case Trump might be right. I know I am going to get flamed into oblivion for saying so but you have to consider the alternatives. The lone wolf threat is probably the most impossible one we face. The talking heads and G-men have been quick to argue there was little or no communication with ISIS. That is not really true though it ignores the fact the one-way communication is still communication. Its also the hardest to cope with because even if we can known who has heard or seen what, in America we don't punish people for listening to things.
I see three options here:
1) Do nothing, This would be best but politically will be impossible after another attack or two.
2) EFF's nightmare, we start monitoring and logging just about everything that happens on the Internet, no more anonymity, broken encryption and systems with backdoors. Government thought police to knock on your physical door when you post the wrong kind of comment. All of this being ineffective to boot as criminals and terrorists will find ways to use side channels, steganography, and other methods to pass information around the Internet anyway. Innovation stifled as 'legitimate' applications can't be used until the government has facility to manage and monitor them.
3) Cut the cord, Great Firewall of America. We stop routing traffic to and from unfriendly parts of the world. For this work we have be willing to cast a broad net. You can't say lets cut off Afghanistan and Syria but let Pakistan and Iraq stay connected. After all the boarders weak and ISIS/Taliban/What have you will use the coffee shot the next town over if that is what they have to do. We would need to consider cutting off 'allies' (I use the term loosely) like Turkey and Saudi Arabia in regions know to be terror hot beds as well unless they are prepared to police things somewhat like option (2) although that is more practical in their societies.
I don't like option 3, but its a hell of a lot better than option 2. Politically speaking we are going to get (2) if we don't support something 'crazy' like (3). That is the current political reality. We build the Internet if proves to be to dangerous or we are to afraid to allow just anyone to use it however they like, than I say lets keep it for ourselves and for western society and culture rather than destroying it for ourselves, in the name of it being a small world or something.
Re:Consider the progression (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
I think my number (1) pretty well covers (4). Do nothing is the 'right thing to do' but politically its not going happen. If you stop people like Trump and Cruz from solving the problem in their lousy but not all together bad for you and I way, you will get Hilliary, Jeb, or Marco doing something that will be a whole lot more shitty.
It will be like when Jesse Ventura got elected in MN. Trump will probably tackle ISIS and have some success even if you don't approve of his methods. The rest of his time wi
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Its like Curz said the other day "I'll direct the pentagon to destroy ISIS"
Guess what that would probably work and I would expect Trump would say something similar. It would probably work. Our Generals don't get where they are in our armed forces by not being effective. If a president told them "eliminate ISIS, I really don't care how and I'll back you" they could probably get it done.
Most presidents don't have the will do the politically unpopular things they would likely want to do. That isn't necessa
Re: (Score:3)
Hear Hear!!!
I'm pretty conservative, and lean republican, but I've frequently voted against republicans who rubs me the wrong way... with Trump I don't know where to begin. He is an embarrassment to Republicans, to politicians, and even to human beings. Every time he speaks he offends me, and I will vote for ANYBODY who runs against him. A president needs to have strength, poise, and compassion. Trump only aspires to one of those things and he is failing miserably at it.
Re: (Score:3)
I think my number (1) pretty well covers (4). Do nothing is the 'right thing to do' but politically its not going happen. If you stop people like Trump and Cruz from solving the problem in their lousy but not all together bad for you and I way, you will get Hilliary, Jeb, or Marco doing something that will be a whole lot more shitty.
"Politically" the "do nothing" may seem impossible, but "realistically" it probably will. Candidates say a lot of shit on the road to get their drones to yell and scream on TV so that they appear popular, and thereby get people to support them in polls because you don't want to look like you're backing a loser. Thus, the Trump-radical snowball effect.
But exactly HOW is anyone going to "shut down", or even "monitor", the Internet, particularly without also affecting the MONEY that depends on the Internet ev
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
You can't legislate against nutjobs with guns.
Australia did (both conservatives and liberals) and it appears to be very effective.
Most Americans seem to work from the basic principle that everyone will always have easy access to guns one way or another, and so it's pointless trying to legislate against them at all.
Whatever your position on gun control, it is certainly a fact that the US has a far higher proportion of people owning firearms than other countries, and so it would require a much more extensive government intervention.
When they basically banned handguns and most weapons except shotguns and hunting rifles in the UK, it
Re:Consider the progression (Score:4, Interesting)
The cut the cord could be analogous to customs, where "packets" have to pass thru customs. Shoot, we litigate IP, we shift tax burden thru IP, why not make IP go thru customs like real stuff.
Re: (Score:3)
3) Cut the cord, Great Firewall of America. We stop routing traffic to and from unfriendly parts of the world. For this work we have be willing to cast a broad net. You can't say lets cut off Afghanistan and Syria but let Pakistan and Iraq stay connected. After all the boarders weak and ISIS/Taliban/What have you will use the coffee shot the next town over if that is what they have to do. We would need to consider cutting off 'allies' (I use the term loosely) like Turkey and Saudi Arabia in regions know to be terror hot beds as well unless they are prepared to police things somewhat like option (2) although that is more practical in their societies.
That's Trump-level stupid. It's not remotely going to work without completely abolishing freedom of speech (one of the things the US does get right). "The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it" [wikiquote.org]. You cannot stop a one-way flow of information. You cannot even stop routing unless you forbid VPNs. In a pinch, I'm sure the EFF, the ACLU, or even Anonymous will provide anonymous routing. Good luck shutting them down without going all the way to Big Brother.
Re:Oh the Irony..... (Score:5, Funny)
But how many people did not join up because of information on the Internet?
Me, for one. When they showed up at the door, at first I thought they were Mormons (Jehovah's Witnesses tend to dress a little shabbier). The only way I could tell they were actually Isis was when I saw the little star-and-crescent pendants they were wearing. In any case, I invited them in and we discussed the ins and outs of their theology over a couple rounds of scotch I had tucked away for just such an occasion (I thought they might balk at the offer but they said that while it was okay for their suicide bombers to drink, recruiting is considered such a shitty assignment that drinking is pretty much encouraged). Anyway, after our conversation had run its length, we had a cheerful departure and I watched them slowly weave down the driveway in their bullet-ridden Hilux (barely managing to avoid snagging their bed-mounted 50-cal on a low-hanging limb). When I'd gone back inside, I sat down and spent some time researching on the Internet, giving careful consideration to the various merits of their belief system (there were more than a few, I assure you), However, in the end I decided that while having to wear a long beard would suck (too itchy) and I don't much care for the thought of eating goat (their eyes weird me out), being outnumbered by 72 virgins would be the real deal-breaker: Six dozen entitled, passive-aggressive little bitches that are guaranteed to be terrible in the sack (being virgins and all)... no thank you.
Re:Oh the Irony..... (Score:5, Interesting)
I'd be happy if we could close up Trump in some way.
How the hell is he still leading the field on the Republican side? Is this some vast right wing conspiracy to get Hillary elected so they can have 4 more years of 'shredding the Constitution' and 'destroying America' rhetoric?
Signed,
A registered Republican who votes for sane candidates... when there are any.
Re: (Score:3)
How the hell is he still leading the field on the Republican side?
The last few decades have shown that the Republican Party is dominated by the craziest person with the loudest voice. Whereas elections were won by who could prostitute themselves to the richest sugardaddy. Now we have a loud, insane guy who is his own sugardaddy.
Then again, I don't truly believe that Trump is as popular as he appears. It is just that the Media loves a side-show. Half just want the comedy, half are just filling time with his antics. Donald Trump is a brand and he really knows how to market
Re: (Score:3)
Free speech and free flow of information does more good than harm. Seems counter intuitive to lock violent radicals out of the very information that could change their minds, educate the ignorant, and carry a non violent message.
Do you have any evidence to back up this assertion? This sounds like one of those assertions that people claim because they think it "makes sense" and is "obvious", but in reality there's actually no evidence to support it at all.
Just look at how politics in America have gone since
Re:Oh the Irony..... (Score:5, Insightful)
That is quite an understatement.
"so what does that tell you...that people are sick of President Obama "
No. It tells me that "some" people are ignorant and racists. I restrain to add stupid as I believe that they are willfully misguiding their intellects for selfish primitive instincts they choose not to to keep in check.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Oh the Irony..... (Score:5, Insightful)
He's trying to win a job where things like chewing gum and your body language down to the exact angle can affect foreign policy and ruin people's livelihood. Do you have any clue how bad Trump in the Whitehouse will be for the US?
This isn't some political comedy movie where the bumbling doofus finds himself in power by hilarious circumstance, and his crude but comic efforts bring about the best possible outcome despite common sense dictating the opposite.
This is how WW3 starts. And if I had to guess it trigger, it would be "I don't care if you're a prime minister or jewish. My staff put this luau style dinner so you'd better have some roast pig. You'd like it if you tried it."
Re:Oh the Irony..... (Score:5, Interesting)
I recently read a book called "The Narcissist Next Door" which details narcissistic personality disorder [wikipedia.org]. Although the book was written years ago, it specifically mentions The Donald as a possible sufferer of the disorder. And based on the symptoms they described, it seems quite likely to me. If so, that would adequately explain all of his behavior that we've seen. In effect, all this isl about drawing attention to himself (which actually is the motivation of any troll.) And if he happens to get elected as President, that's just gravy (for him.) That said, as a narcissist, he would fully believe that he's the best person for the job. So he would believe that he should be elected.
I recently saw program where a commentator observed that unlike other politicians, Trump "doubles down" on anything stupid that he says. For example, the more that people point out that there is no evidence of thousands celebrating in New Jersey when the twin towers came down, the more he pushes the idea.
According to the book, a narcissist - in the clinical sense - is incapable of admitting he's wrong. So, whenever that gets pointed out by someone, it must be the fault of an external party. In this case, he can blame the media for misreporting the "facts" or whatever: he's never, ever, ever, simply "wrong."
Re:Oh the Irony..... (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't think Donald Trump is a clown or an idiot. I think he knows exactly what he's doing, which is pandering to idiocy. It's working well, and that says very sad things about Republicans.
Level 18 troll alert! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Oh the Irony..... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, Trump can be a fool, but sadly he's probably the best we have currently running...
No, Trump is a fool, not can be. And if you think he is probably the best you have currently running, then you are glued to him instead of looking around. Even in GOP, there are a few who are much better than Trump but they won't see the light.
Trump talks but not walks. He always explains good thing VAGUELY (e.g. something good, something better, something blah blah), but nit picking all bad things in minute detail. He ALWAYS praise himself while putting everyone else (who is against him) down in a bully way. It is a psychological tactic. It works on those who have some thing in common with him. When one sees a person who agrees in something that the one dislikes, the one would automatically like the person. That's what he is using -- dislike President Obama. If one tries to be in the middle, the one will see tactics from both Republicants and Democrats. Period.
Re:Oh the Irony..... (Score:5, Insightful)
I dunno. I read it less as "those who oppose Obama must be racist" and more as "I'd rephrase that as 'Trump is saying what the people want to hear so what does that tell you... that people are ignorant and racist'", which doesn't involve Obama at all. I mean, it could be the way you're interpreting it, that's just not the way I did.
Re:Oh the Irony..... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
> It tells me that "some" people are ignorant and racists
Half of people are below average intelligence.
*shakes head* Median. Half of people are below median intelligence.
*shakes head a bit more* Average. Half of the people are below average intelligence. Due to the law of large numbers and the construction that intelligence has finite variance, intelligence is normally distributed. Therefore the statement holds for the three most used averages: Mode, Median and (arithmetic) Mean.
Free speech (Score:5, Insightful)
...and the democrats want to "kill the very instrument that would be most effective in de-radicalizing people" which are firearms.
There is no lack of firearms in the Middle East and yet their availability (and routine use) is clearly not slowing radicalization. Your argument makes zero sense and is clearly contradicted by the facts. Your notion that radicalization is effectively fought with firearms is not supported by the US Military. You cannot win a war of ideas with guns. All you can do is provide time and space for your own ideas. We've dumped trillions of dollars into wars in the Middle East and groups like ISIS are stronger than ever as a result. The ONLY thing that will ultimately defeat groups like ISIS is with speech and ideas. Firearms can only suppress them for a time at best. You don't win hearts and minds at the point of a gun.
I'm not for banning anything, but we should block hate speech or any speech associated with known or suspected terrorists.
You claim to not be for banning anything and then contradict yourself in the same sentence. So clearly you aren't in favor of free speech. Here's a hint - free speech doesn't just consist of speech you approve of.
Trump is a bit of a clown but he's saying what the people want to hear so what does that tell you...
It tells me that the people who are taking him seriously are idiots. The words "President Trump" should be terrifying to anyone with a functioning brain. What people need to hear and what they want to hear are frequently different.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You cannot win a war of ideas with guns.
Sure you can. You give both sides guns, set them against each other and see who the last person standing is. Their ideas are the ones that win.
That's kinda what Trump is going for, right?
Re:Free speech (Score:4, Insightful)
"War does not decide who is right, war decides who is left."
Re:Oh the Irony..... (Score:5, Insightful)
Guns are not the solution, they are your damn problem. Look no Western country allows to carry around guns and buy guns that easily. And you have a mass shooting almost every day. It is in fact not different if the person does that because he or she is a fascist, racist, islamist, or something else. The only thing that would help is gun control. Your ignorance (as a country) will be your undoing.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
These happened yesterday:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/08/26/were-now-averaging-more-than-one-mass-shooting-per-day-in-2015/
You don't hear about them every day for the same reason that you don't usually hear about car crashes on the national news;
it's so common that it's not news-worthy unless a muslim is involved.
Re: (Score:3)
"Every day, huh? What mass shooting happened yesterday?"
The one from yesterday was put on an earlier date, it already happened on one of those 355 mass shootings during this year.
Some days there have to be several mass shootings, otherwise they can't put them all into one year.
https://www.washingtonpost.com... [washingtonpost.com]
Re: Oh the Irony..... (Score:4, Informative)
Every day, huh? What mass shooting happened yesterday?
It only feels like everyday, but shootings have gone down dramatically each decade.
Apparently it really depends on your definition of mass shootings. By the most broad definition I could find (4 or more people shot in a single incident) there were 353 mass shootings in the US in 2015 by November 23rd. So about one per day on average.
By the most narrow definition I could find (a single non-gang, robbery, or domestic violence incident where 4 or more people die), there were 4 mass shootings in the US in 2015 by November 23rd. With the same definition but replace death with just being shot, the number goes up to 61.
The incidents people actually think about when they hear mass shootings probably lies closer to the 61 figure. Which means about 5-6 mass shootings per month.
source [dallasnews.com]
Re: Oh the Irony..... (Score:5, Insightful)
The fact that you think nearly 300 incidents in which 4 or more people were shot wouldn't fit people's image of mass shootings just shows how warped your citizens perspective is on guns.
Re: (Score:3)
Unless you count service members killed in action, I doubt it. Most gun-related violence in the US happens in large urban areas and tends to be gang related. I live in a small city of 300,000 people and I can count the number of firearm-related deaths this year on one hand. In all cases it was gang/drug related from out of town. Each time it made the local news for a week or so.
You're both confusing gun related crimes and gun related deaths, which are most commonly accidents where people shoot themselves with a gun they thought was unloaded. The accidental deaths far outnumber the crime-related gun deaths but both sides want you to believe otherwise. Pro-gun folks want you to believe everyone should carry a gun because all the "bad guys" are invading homes and assaulting them (statistically incredibly rare---less than 0.1% --http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/ascii/vdhb.txt ), or wa
Re:Oh the Irony..... (Score:4, Interesting)
And neither do most Eastern countries, or Southern countries, or Northern countries, etc. Yet many of them have murder rates far higher than the US.
Oh great so the US does not suck compared to a large number of dictatorships and failing states? I compared the US to states which are democracies and have at least a comparable GDP per capita.
And you have a mass shooting almost every day
Only by a measure which includes 'shootings' in which nobody was killed, and the vast majority is gang violence in the inner city.
Have a look at http://shootingtracker.com/wik... [shootingtracker.com]
And no it makes no difference whether Jihad Joe, Racist Randolf or Narco Nick kills people. The people are terrified by that.
31,537 people die from gun violence every year in the USA. Based on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] you have 10.5 people shot per 100 000 people a year. In Germany that is 1.24, in Spain 0.62, in the Netherlands 0.46. And you think you do not have a problem? Really)
BTW: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] that we have far less people in prison. So western Europe looks quite save to me.
With rape it is 27.3 (2010) in the USA, in France 16.2 (2009) in Germany 9.4 (2010) in Spain 3.4 (2010). It is only higher in Sweden 63.5. However, they have very different laws what rape is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
And we do not have a refugee crisis. We have a problem in distributing refugees fairly in Europe. However, I am absolutely sure that Germany and Sweden are able to handle it. Not so sure about Greece, but maybe the EU will figure out a way to work together again (which is the real issue). Also we have a problem with fascist and nationalist movements in eastern Europe, e.g., Hungary and Poland. Still it does not make things better for you when we fail on our own problems. You will still have your gun problem.
Re: (Score:3)
Gun control helped to have 1.24 death by gun violence per 100 000 people in France and Germany compared to 10.5 in the US (figures 2010).
gun control also helps to limit the ability to commit mass shootings. It does not completely circumvent such acts. In case of France, a better integration program, social workers, and education/training programs would have helped. This have been iterated here http://www.theguardian.com/pro... [theguardian.com]
Re:Oh the Irony..... (Score:5, Insightful)
No... he's pandering to the lowest common denominator including people who watch reality TV and idiots like you.
Re:Oh the Irony..... (Score:4, Insightful)
and why should we pretend that the bottom of the barrel trailer park trash that support him are anything to be listened to.
Because their vote counts just as much as yours or mine does. Ignore them at your own peril.
Trump is a troll (Score:5, Insightful)
America should consider ignoring Donald Trump in every way. The guy is the political equivalent of a troll. He adds nothing but noise to the political debate. It merely deflects attention from things that actually matter.
Re: Trump is a troll (Score:5, Insightful)
Careful thats what they said about Goldwater. Then he won the nomination. Sure he lost the general but 4 years later Nixon won with Goldwater's policies wrapped in subtler language. Trump could spell a fascist victory in subtler language for another gop candidate in 2020...
Who would have thought? (Score:3)
Nixon will be considered a good president compared to the last two ass clowns and if we elect trump,,,,,Oh my!
Re:Who would have thought? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Somehow, I don't see Trump being an effective negotiator.
He wrote a book on it, and he's done a lot of negotiation, so that is the one area where I see that he would be effective.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
To some degree Trump is refreshing. A lot of people have become absolutely fed up with political correctness that has run amok in the country in the last few decades (and it seems particularly within the last 5 years or so). They feel so oppressed by this sense of having to tip-toe around everyone's feelings and sensitivities that anyone who throws that out with blatant disregard is exciting.
They know he's an idiot, just like I know a bacon double cheeseburger is terrible for me, but when you've been on a
We have a lot of foolish people... (Score:5, Insightful)
"We have a lot of foolish people" If that's not irony, I don't know what is.
Re: (Score:3)
Looked up:
"a state of affairs or an event that seems deliberately contrary to what one expects and is often amusing as a result"
A public statement can be considered an event, the statement was contrary to what was intended/expected, and it was amusing as a result. I suppose you could argue about the word "deliberately", but often what is considered irony is unintentional, causing the person making the statement to become the butt of the joke instead of the person making a joke.
Godwin (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Godwin (Score:2)
And when he proposed every single Nuremberg law you didnt see it ?
Re:Godwin (Score:5, Interesting)
You're exaggerating. He might mess up his country and a bunch of other countries in bad ways if he is elected, but he's nowhere as dangerous or evil as Hitler. He's essentially a clown, a narcissist entertainer who was blessed with and psychologically corrupted by a lot of inherited wealth. The kind of guy who is proud to be an asshole and actually is one, as opposed to all these likable 'nice assholes' who in reality aren't.
Yes, it will be Hillary vs Trump, Trump will become the next George W. Bush^3 of the USA, and after his reign,the US might be at the brink of a civil war, but at least its going to be entertaining. In the long run, a weak and reasonably fucked up US can be beneficial to Europe, so I don't worry too much.
Re: Godwin (Score:3)
GP is right. Hitler was a failed painter before his circumstances changed. Give Trump some power and he'll vigorously exercise it without a second thought - all while considering himself virtuous for doing so.
http://hawaii.edu/powerkills [hawaii.edu]
Re:Godwin (Score:5, Interesting)
To be fair, while he hasn't proposed concentration camps yet, neither did Hitler when he was first rising to power. I have a feeling the German people would have rejected "let's kill all the Jews and everyone who disagrees with me" if he led with that idea. Instead, he began with smaller ideas. You are suffering (which Germany was and which Trump supporters seem to think America is) and it's all these people's fault (putting the blame on another group - be they Jews, Muslims, or Mexicans). Then, since it's all their fault, they should be identified (star on their clothes or a national Muslim database) and segregated from "normal society." Then, you need a task force to deal with these undesirables (Trump's Deportation Force might not be as bad as the SS on paper, but I doubt the SS on paper was exactly what they became).
No, Trump isn't Hitler, but he's stoking the same xenophobic flames, is proposing clearly unconstitutional ideas without care as to their legality, and doing so while his supporters seem to say "We don't care if it's legal or not, those people need to be 'taken care of.'" History has shown us where this path leads and it's NOT a nice place. It's certainly not anywhere that I'd want America heading towards.
Re:Godwin (Score:4, Informative)
Why do you love Islam and hate Nazism? It is because Islam originate from brown peoples and therefore you need to prove the world you are not racist? You know that both ideologies are racist, hateful and violent?
Uh, Islam is most explicitly NOT racist. The Ummah encompasses all Muslims throughout the world and does not care what race or ethnicity you are. You do realize the most populous Muslim nation isn't even "brown", right? It's Indonesia, and 62% of all Muslims live in South and Southeast Asia. Even better, and this will really blow your confused little mind, is that in ISIS(and in al-Qaeda,and the Taliban) some of the most feared fighters are actually of European descent!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
First of all, it will not be Hilary vs Trump. Hilary, yes. Trump? I would be willing to place a friendly wager with you that it will not be Trump. Not by a long shot. Yes, he is getting all the media attention because he's a nutjob and what media outlet doesn't like to cover a story that writes itself? It's easy money.
Second, all of you amaze me in your ignorance of the American political system. The President does have power, but Congress has a lot more. Appropriations, oversight, you name it and C
Re:Godwin (Score:5, Insightful)
It's fascinating to observe -- this must be what it was like in the early 30's in Germany, watching the fascists rise to power.
I'm waiting for him to talk about "solutions" to the "Muslim problem" -- final ones, even.
Re: (Score:3)
Close, but who he is really like is Benito Mussolini - the man who prepared the way for Hitler.
"The Donald", "Il Duce", it is an eerie parallel
Mussolini predated Hitler's rise to power by a decade and was petulant when Hitler did show suitable obsequiousness acknowledging his seniority in fascism. Even that narcissistic self-regard sounds exactly like Trump.
Re:Godwin (Score:4, Funny)
Well, if the only choice you have is a candidate who has a beaver and one that tacked on to his head...
Disease (Score:3)
Re:Disease (Score:5, Insightful)
Because there is a change happening in America. No longer can "old, white Christian guys" (OWCG) be assured that they are the most powerful group. Now you have "upstarts" like women and Latinos and non-Christians gaining power. OWCGs see this as a threat but they feel powerless to stop them. Trump taps into OWCGs' frustration and fans their various hatreds (xenophobia, racism, etc). He says what they are all thinking because he himself is an OWCG. So they follow him and cheer him on without worrying about where his proposals will lead America. Because they see a Trump presidency as returning OWCGs to the seat of power and shoving everyone else back into their "proper place" of obeying the rules that OWCGs set.
In the long run, OWCGs can't win. This change will happen whether they like it or not. When I have grandchildren, they will regard many of the OWCGs ideas the same way most of today's society regards "black people should be kept separate and second class from white people." Yes, there's an ever-diminishing fringe that believes that, but society at large has moved on. OWCGs will be that fringe in a few decades. The only question is whether we'll keep moving forward or if President Trump will hit the brakes for a couple of years (slowing us down but not stopping us).
Re:Disease (Score:5, Interesting)
What is the disease does this country have in listening to people like this?
Greed.
Seriously, you can trace this all back to Tobacco companies fighting to protect their profits. In the early 1970s they devised a strategy to manufacture anti-government propaganda and "grassroots" organizations to distribute them. These organizations provided both inspiration and support to the Koch brothers when they started their own anti-government advocacy and recruiting group in 1984, Citizens for a Sound Economy (CSE). As an interesting note, Ron Paul was the first director of Citizens for a Sound Economy. In the 80s and 90s, CSE was funded by Philip Morris, General Electric, Exxon and Microsoft (among others). In 2004 it split into FreedomWorks and Americans for Prosperity.
Both of CSE's successor groups were involved in creating the Tea Party political movement, the goal of that movement was to get people who have not normally been involved in political groups involved (specifically on the far right side of the Republican). They use populism and demagoguery to motivate these people, so it should be no surprise that the end result is support for populist demagogues. However, those same attributes have been driving reasonable people out of the party, as each election cycle the people motivated by the populist rhetorical impose more stringent populist requirements on the leadership, continually pushing them to the right. At first the Republican leadership embraced the new populism because it helped them win elections they had no right to win, now it may too late for them to salvage anything from the ruins of the party. Increasingly, it seem, the only Republicans who matter are the radical Tea Party ignoratti.
So the genesis for Trump's success lies in advocacy groups created to lobby for the right to poison and kill your customers and neighbours. Caveat Emptor, America! Freedom is cheaper than responsibility!
Re: (Score:3)
I've checked current presidential race standings out of curiosity (living in Europe) Trump is hands down the most likely republican candidate, the next candidate has about half of his popularity.
The problem with those polls is that the Republican field is diluted. Most of the people who would support Trump are already polling as supporting Trump. As some of the 15+ other candidates start to drop out, most of their supports will go to support candidates other than Trump. The problem is that, in the meantime, Trump is the "frontrunner" (at usually somewhere in the 20-30% range) so the media focuses on this and inadvertently(or maybe intentionally?) lending credence to his positions. You should al
Re: (Score:3)
The problem with those polls is that the Republican field is diluted. Most of the people who would support Trump are already polling as supporting Trump. As some of the 15+ other candidates start to drop out, most of their supports will go to support candidates other than Trump.
I think Trump can pick up nearly all of the support of Carson and Cruz, the two others who are benefiting from the ignorance and crazy talk crowd.
If you add up their numbers and Trump's what do you get? The latest national poll [realclearpolitics.com] on this had Trump at 33%, Cruz at 13% and Carson at 15%, that adds up to 61%. And I am not cherry picking polls. The link I provided summarizes all of the polling, and you can pick any of them. Last Friday's CNN poll would put that total at 66%
The rest of the candidates are irrelevan
Re: (Score:3)
Suppose the caucus did nominate Trump (I don't know how they work.)
Surely in a national election, Trump would have no chance?
The Democrats could nominate Joffrey Baratheon, and win by a landslide.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Disease (Score:5, Insightful)
Trump is still around because there is a large base of people who buy into the stuff he says.
Even more, he is still around because he sells papers (well, TV advertising). Even people who don't support him can't help but turn on the TV to see what wacky idea he has come up with today. The media knows this, so they throw him in our faces every chance they get. If he wasn't such an entertaining spectacle, the media would have dropped him months ago and he would have been stumping in half-filled halls to a dwindling number of supporters while the news focused on the other candidates (probably trying to dig up dirt on marital infidelities or contrast a candidates current policies with a statement he made in high-school).
Of course, Trump is well aware of this too, so he keeps saying ever more outrageous things just so he can keep making headlines. Not only does this feed his huge ego, it increases his visibility and makes him seem a viable candidate. Many people refuse to vote for somebody unless they think there's a chance that person can win, and with Trump in the news all the time, it makes him seem more popular than he really is (of course, eventually this becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy).
Trump is one of the greatest political trolls ever, and his success is largely because the news is so addicted to advertising dollars they can't help but feed the troll.
What really terrifies me is that next election, other politicians are going to take note of Trump's success and are going to follow in his footsteps until eventually we'll end up with somebody like President Dwayne Elizondo 'Mountain Dew' Herbert Camacho.
Re:Disease (Score:5, Interesting)
And here is your typical Trump supporter, fiscally cartoon-conservative and socially a closeted pseudo-nazi. They hate the shit out of every aspect of social progress and have a monstrous persecution complex, even though they're virtually all straight white Christian Americans, the most privileged and powerful group in the known universe.
They hate that social progressiveness restrains and effectively muzzles their many potent prejudices, and they hate when science and evidence disagree with their stupid gut feelings on other issues.
And Trump is a giant nuclear double-middle-finger to progressiveness and facts, who promises to finally give them what they want, to run their country based on their many potent prejudices and uninformed gut feelings.
Talk to Bill Gates? (Score:5, Funny)
"We have to go see Bill Gates," Trump said, to better understand the Internet and then possibly "close it up.""
Why Bill Gates? We all know he has nothing to do with the internets and it was Al Gore the one who invented it. But, of course, Trump wouldn't engage a dem even to save the country of those pesky... well, everybodies.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Bill Gates has many years of experience in trying to ignore, downplay, take over and, finally, destroy the internet.
More likely though, Trump probably just likes the idea of renaming the Internet "Trump Gates".
Re:Talk to Bill Gates? (Score:5, Insightful)
The biggest Irony of all:
Microsoft is the worst example of TCP/IP expertise. Going to Gates, would be like questioning Steve Jobs about the NT kernel.
I'm with Jeb on this one (Score:4, Insightful)
Jeb Bush has summed up Trump very nicely, and in a single word: "Unhinged [twitter.com]".
Re:I'm with Jeb on this one (Score:5, Funny)
Well, I guess the GOP was fed up with being accused of just having a mouth piece as a candidate, so they traded up for a hair piece.
Google is probably a bigger threat. (Score:2, Informative)
Meanwhile Eric Schmidt proposes a ContentID-like system to suppress "hate speech". [bbc.com]
Pick your poison, left or right, up or down, makes no difference.
Bill Gates?! (Score:3)
HAHAHAHA Because Bill Gates, of all people, understood the internet from the get-go.
It's not a series of tubes, it's a Tidal Wave [wikipedia.org].
America Responds: (Score:2)
America: The Don Should Consider "Closing the Don's Pie-Hole Up In Some Way"
Trump is a plant (Score:2)
Re:Trump is a plant (Score:5, Interesting)
If he's a ringer, then what does it say that he has the backing of enough Republicans to keep ahead in the polls - ahead of the "real" GOP candidates?
If he's not a ringer, then the same question applies.
Ringer or not, he's ahead in the polls. There's a worrisome number of people who are saying "Close down Mosques? Sounds good. Track all Muslims? Great idea. Ban all Muslim immigrants and form a deportation task force to get rid of 11 million Mexicans? Fantastic!"
Re: (Score:3)
He was recently interviewed on the Alex Jones show and Alex very directly asked that question. Trump answered without really answering the question.
That doesn't really signify very much, because Trump never answers any question. Because if he did, it would show he has no clue about anything he says and just spouts off whatever he thinks people want to hear. Remember, this is a guy who, when asked about foreign policy or what he would do in a certain situation, basically said:"I have no idea, that's what I have people for, to tell me what to do".
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
My favorite Skit! (Score:4, Funny)
You know SNL has really hit it over the top this year with this Donald Trump for president running gag.....
Which country is calling? (Score:2)
Talk to Bill Gates? (Score:4, Funny)
Wouldn't Al Gore be the better person to talk to about changing internet Architecture?
Re:Talk to Bill Gates? (Score:4, Insightful)
But Al Gore is a dirty, rotten Liberal and Bill Gates is a wholesome, job-creating Businessman. Trump would much rather deal with the latter.
Something unhealthy must be in that glue (Score:5, Funny)
that keeps that hairpiece on the skull. It sinks in and poisons what's left of his brains.
At the Pinnacle of the GOP (Score:5, Interesting)
Many people make fun of Donald Trump or don't take him seriously. What most don't realize is that he is represents the pinnacle of what the Republican Party has become. All that he says is little more than populist slurs and factually incorrect statements, barring any context. He is extremely anti social, anti socialist and very pro industry and military. He resents using government money for social programs but has no problems spending the same taxpayer money for military projects. His world view is an immature outlook where the US is at the center and the rest is a nuisance or a playground for the military. He willingly and knowingly misleads the public using fear, uncertainty and doubt tactics. When he's on television he revels in the attention and uses it to entertain people with outlandish rants and to polish his public image as an anti-establishment rebel, while saying absolutely nothing of consequence. He is the kind of person that can only appeal to, for lack of a better word: white trash and its scary that it has come so far that he reaches mass appeal in the US. Abraham Lincoln must be turning in his grave from what his party has become.
America's image (Score:3)
Outside of the USA, the USA doesn't have a great image. It never really had, to be honest.
And, unfortunately for the USA, Donald Trump is doing absolutely nothing to make that image any better.
If anyone were to look just at Donald and how he represents you guys, then they will see an idiot, a racist, a bigot, a religious intolerant... he posses, in their worst forms, all of the bad stereotypes applied to "Americans". And, in many ways, he is the most un-American person one could point to. Taking just the simplest of American values - Freedom: He wants to close down the internet, ban Muslims, and have everyone saying 'Merry Christmas', because that's obviously what Freedom means to him.
I really feel sorry for you guys. He really does make the whole country look like a joke. I dare not imagine what your country will become if he were to be elected.
To be honest, there's an awful lot of things that he says that reminds me of one Adolf Hitler.
- observations from an outsider.
Trump likes the attention (Score:4, Insightful)
I've always thought that Trump just does this because he likes the attention. His comments lately may be him trying to get out of the race.
Trump likes his riches too much to actually be president. It's never felt like he actually wants the job.
Why attack Trump not Clinton? (Score:5, Interesting)
Both Trump and Clinton said the same thing. Why only attack one of them in the summary when the article criticizes both parties? This goes to show that both sides have no concern for the constitution, and are probably just pandering to fears.
The article says:
Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton urged tech companies to “deny online space” to terrorists. Clinton then anticipated and waved away presumed First Amendment criticisms. We’re going to hear all the usual complaints,” she said on Monday, “you know, freedom of speech, et cetera. But if we truly are in a war...
Wow, she basically summarized the first amendment as "blah blah blah" and justified that it is okay to violate the constitution during wartime. This is the exact same kind of logic that was used 200 years ago that made us write those constitutional amendments. We have been fighting the same political battles for 200 years.
Rhetorical singularity (Score:3)
Are we witnessing the final stages of some sort of Trump Rhetorical Singularity?
It seems like every news cycle he has to top himself by saying something even more hyperbolic, and that in the last week the velocity of the hyperbole has been noticeably accelerating.
At this rate, I assume that by Saturday he will be calling for the immediate launching of nuclear missiles against every country that might harbor terrorist, and where he goes after that nobody can even speculate.
Good times!
Asking Bill Gates about the Internet??? (Score:3)
Doesn't that pinhead Trump realize Microsoft doesn't understand the Internet - That's why the Internet runs on Linux and BSD. Hell, even MS is recommending deploying their Azure environment on Linux...
Re: (Score:3)
All he's REALLY interested in in getting big tax breaks for himself and his business/rich buddies.
Not buying it. Being able to throw millions around is already a great way to make that happen without the hassle of running for office. Trump's motivation is most likely fairly simple: he's an attention whore, and being in the limelight strokes his ego. Becoming "the most powerful man in the world" (f that's his end game) does so even more.
Re: (Score:3)
What's frightening is that you'd choose a crazy bigoted egomaniac over a fairly unremarkable Democrat who has become the devil incarnate to right-wingers somehow. I never understood the incredible amount of hate that US conservatives have for Hillary. Since she's a huge war-hawk by Dem standards, you'd think they might even find her more tolerable.