Skip to main content

"Trump offers no moral leadership, seems to have no interest in unifying this nation. No evidence that the presidency has awakened his conscience in the least."

"Indeed, we have a president with a toxic tongue who has publicly and unapologetically embraced a political strategy of hate, racism and division."

Said Joe Biden, yesterday, quoted at The Hill, where I'm also seeing these responses from Trump:

1. "Watching Sleepy Joe Biden making a speech. Sooo Boring! The LameStream Media will die in the ratings and clicks with this guy. It will be over for them, not to mention the fact that our Country will do poorly with him. It will be one big crash, but at least China will be happy!"

2. "My critics are political people. They’re trying to make points. In many cases, they’re running for president and they’re very low in the polls."

To summarize: Biden looked for moral leadership and Trump said, hey, think about ratings, think about polls.

ADDED: In one way, Trump reinforced Biden's point. Trump isn't about finding what is true and good and leading the people to a higher ground. Trump is about entertainment. What's good TV? What polls well?

And that shows how, in another way, Trump undermines the idea that Trump is about "hate, racism and division." Trump is being exciting and interesting and entertaining. He's reacting to the response — positive and negative — that he gets from the crowds and from media and continually reprocessing the material to keep people interested and excited.

If it's hate, racism, and division — or something some people hear or pretend to hear as hate, racism, and division — it's because that's what he's learned excites and interests and entertains. He tries moral leadership too, but that's not heard and amplified. Not good ratings.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

"The theory that we are living in a computer simulation may sound bizarre, but it has found adherents."

"The technology entrepreneur Elon Musk has said that the odds that we are not simulated are 'one in billions.' Professor Smoot estimates that the ratio of simulated to real people might be as high as 10¹² to 1.... [I]f our universe has been created by an advanced civilization for research purposes, then it is reasonable to assume that it is crucial to the researchers that we don’t find out that we’re in a simulation. If we were to prove that we live inside a simulation, this could cause our creators to terminate the simulation — to destroy our world. Of course, the proposed experiments may not detect anything that suggests we live in a computer simulation. In that case, the results will prove nothing. This is my point: The results of the proposed experiments will be interesting only when they are dangerous." From "Are We Living in a Computer Simulation? Let’s Not Find Out/Experimental findings will be either boring or extremely dangerous" by philosophy pro...
Post a Comment
Read more

"It's just a type of berry from Japan, unfortunately. Very cool though!"

Went to a small fruit farm were they grew strawberries crossed with raspberries. from r/pics Rubus illecebrosus — "a red-fruited species of Rubus that originally came from Japan (where is it called バライチゴ, roseberry), but is also very popular in some European countries like Lithuania. Common names include balloon berry and strawberry raspberry."
Post a Comment
Read more

"Are You Rich? This Income- Rank Quiz Might Change How You See Yourself."

This is a little 5-question quiz in the NYT. One of the questions is "In your view, being 'rich' means having an income in the ..." — with various choices: "top 25%, top 20%, top 15%, top 10%, top 5%, top 1%." So the answer you get to "Are you rich?" is based on your own definition of who is rich. I only need to make $153,000 to be in the top 5% where I live and only $175,000 to be in the top 5% in the NYC metropolitan area. Who thinks they're rich if they make $175,000 in NYC? Can you even afford a 1-bedroom apartment?! From the article accompanying the quiz: The researchers found that a “vast majority” of their respondents believed they were poorer, relative to others, than they actually were. The people who thought they were right in the middle of the income distribution – perfectly middle class, you might say — were, on average, closer to the 75th percentile. And as a group, respondents whose incomes actually resembled the true median thou...
Post a Comment
Read more