Why America's Love Affair with Rule-Breaking Leaders Provided an Open Door for Trump

by Nomad

A recent poll revealed an interesting and somewhat disturbing trend in politics. When it comes to leadership, nearly half of the country would be happy with a president that breaks rules. And guess whose supporters overwhelming uphold that idea that rules and laws are for losers? 

Breaking Rules for the Greater Good

Yesterday, I stumbled across some interesting bit of information from one of the thousand of polls. 

According to a survey by the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization, nearly half of Americans (45%) think that because things in the US have gone so far off the rails, the nation needs a leader who's willing to break some rules to put things in order. Slightly more than half of the respondents (51%) disagreed.  

If you think about it, it's really a frightening idea.

But what does it mean "to break the rules"? Does this mean voters think a leader must break laws too? Since laws are rules, that is the implication. And because the Constitution is the foundation of legal powers of the government, does it mean that half of the country would elect a leader that would violate the Constitution? 

And since the Supreme Court is the official final arbitrator of how the Constitution is applied, does this mean that 45% of the nation believes a president should listen to the high court decisions only when he agrees with it? Suddenly the entire question of the rule of law is called into question. All of our international treaties and nation-to-nation relationships are left to the whims of a leader who likes to shake things up and be "unpredictable." 

Dictators and Opportunities We Offer Them

by Nomad

No, Mr. Trump. Greed is Not Good. It is a Form of Evil.

by Nomad

A Swiss news story about an illegal profiteering scheme underscores the reality behind Donald Trump's often recited principle about the glories of greed. 

Greed and Moral Decay of the American Voter

The presumptive nominee for the Republican party in this year's presidential election really wants you to know something.
Trump is greedy.. times three.

"My whole life I’ve been greedy, greedy, greedy. I’ve grabbed all the money I could get. I’m so greedy. But now I want to be greedy for the United States. I want to grab all that money. I’m going to be greedy for the United States."

Trump's philosophy is that greed is a good thing. In fact, it is such a good thing that he wants the entire nation to surrender to it. If the Bible says:

For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evils. It is through this craving that some have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many pangs.

Trump's advice?
Ignore it. That idea is for losers.
And if the Christian doctrine says:

But those who desire to be rich fall into temptation, into a snare, into many senseless and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction.

Mister, you'd better wise up.
The New Age of Trumpism is nearly upon us. And for a limited time only, you have a chance to get in on the ground floor!

The very nature of greed- mainly its insatiable self-centeredness- tends to cast doubt on the idea that Trump will ever charitable focus his greedy nature for the sake of the country.

It really makes no sense.
Logically, greedy people are not greedy if they want to share their wealth, their skills or any of their material blessings. Still there are a lot of suckers and chumps out there ready to take that leap of faith and vote for Trump. He's given them enough warning but they want ever so much to believe.

How Donald Trump Tried to Use the Homeless as a Weapon to Throw Obstinate Tenants on the Street

by Nomad

Back in the 1980s, property developer, Trump pulled out all stops to evict tenants from their homes and out into the street. He was even ready to use New York's homeless as a tool in his scheme.

Trump and the Tenants

In the early 1980s, Donald Trump had a dream of putting his personal stamp on the Manhattan skyline. It meant a lot to him to establish himself as something more than the son of Fred Trump.

He had been determined to show the world that he was far more crafty and a lot more ambitious than his father. Fred Trump had worked his own property magic in Brooklyn but son Donald wanted to show the world- and himself- that he was bigger than that.   So, in a literal and figurative sense, Trump was ready to cross the bridge between middle-class hum-drum Brooklyn to the fabulous upper-class domains of Manhattan.

And in that regard, Trump had already made a name for himself with a string of home runs in the late 1970s, such as the development of property owned by the bankrupted Penn Central Railroad. As a twenty-eight-year-old unknown, Donald had to reply on his father's political connections to seal the deal.  The project offered to Trump reportedly included a lot of sweeteners, like tax abatements.

That property would later become the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center.

Then, after establishing his reputation as a deal-maker with his own political connection, Trump was ready for his next golden opportunity.

Mr. Trump had paid just $13 million for 100 Central Park South and the building adjoining it, the Barbizon Plaza Hotel, in 1981. It was prime real estate overlooking Central Park. 

Indeed, it was considered to be one of the city’s most desirable blocks.

And Trump had audacious ideas in his head. His proposal included the demolition of the building and its neighbor- which he also owned. He then planned to construct a luxury high-rise condominium complex facing Central Park. It must have seemed like money in the bank.

Three Ways Clinton Could Go Down in History as the Person who Handed the Presidency to Trump

by Nomad

Philip Wallace, writing for the Washington Post Weekly, offers some words of caution for Clinton supporters who might believe they have the election in the bag.
This has been an election filled with mistaken assumptions. Nothing can be assumed, especially at this point. There are, Wallace observes, three ways that Trump could win the election. 

When Racism is Just a Word

By overestimating the negative reaction to Trump's bigotry and misogynist remarks Clinton could be miscalculating the mood of the nation.

   

People care most about bigotry most if it translates into harmful acts, says Wallace. In this way, allegations that Trump's remarks are injurious or directly related to discrimination (or violence) could have an impact.

Otherwise, the voting public is much more likely to give Trump the benefit of the doubt, and believe his  heartfelt declaration that there is no hatred in his heart." There are more people who are willing to dismiss Trump's thoughtless and tacit approval of racism than you might think.

"More fundamentally, Trump's chosen idiom is us-verses-them xenophobia, not racism. The "us" part invites "regular" Americans to feel themselves as a people, in large part by identifying and rejecting the elites' cosmopolitanism as poisonous to our national fiber. That way of thinking doesn't have to be racial at all.