Forum Thread

Your thoughts on CPAC?


Reply to ThreadDisplaying 16 - 30 of 50 Prev 1 2 3 4 Next
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    In reading our posts about last year's CPAC, it would be entertaining perhaps (if one can stand it) to watch Trump speak at today's CPAC conference. I use the word "entertaining" because in a way it is a glimpse into the continually running "reality show", where each year seems to be a carbon copy of last year's with lots of mention of God by almost every speaker. It is a good example of how the Republican Party has become a theocracy. When you are arguing politics with CPAC speakers and their "flock" you are arguing religion...an argument you cannot win.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    As many media pundits have been noting, the person most mentioned by all the CPAC speakers is the 29 year-old Rep Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and her New Green Deal. Republicans seem to have an obsession with her, like she is running for president or something. Are they afraid of her?.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Business Insider: In Trump's wide-ranging, 'off-script' CPAC speech, he ignored his chaotic week and lashed out at Mueller and Democrats

    Watching TV pundits talk about Trump's speech today to CPAC, the word "unhinged" was used several times. I have provided an early Business Insider link, but I'll expect his speech to be dissected by others over the next few days.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Schmidt, I guarantee that the "god" thing won't help them; because " white power religion" is also an lie on itself. But yeah the CPAC shows how "cults" come into being. This "cult" leader is about as nutty as an "cult" who all killed themselves in Guyana. They will stand with the "god" sent idiot until the end. So my prediction is that it will be an long time yet before we can relax and breathe normal again.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    CPAC=a circle jerk of mental masturbators.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Schmidt:

    I agree with you that the Republicans are terrified of AOC, primarily because she has shown a proven ability to ask some very tough questions. Her questions during the Cohen hearing will very likely bring charges at federal, state, and local levels against Trump and his family.

    A letter to the editor in our local newspaper was wondering if Jane Fonda was a fan of AOC, which caused my to wonder where the hell THAT came from.

    As you are probably aware, the stories about Jane Fonda being a traitor to our troops is absolute nonsense:

    https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/jane-fonda-pows/

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    The CPAC convention had a lot of weird moments, and this is one of them:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4gNpBpsk70

    Trump managed to set a new record for his longest speech yet, at roughly 2 hours and 29 minutes - and most of it was sheer nonsense. To the followers of his cult, though, it felt like God was talking directly to them, since many of them actually believe that Trump was "chosen by God".

    The best visual for what happened last week in Maryland was a 1984 Superbowl ad that has been rated as the best ever Superbowl ad. The minions in the audience are a good representation of Trump followers.

    The lady throwing the hammer?

    If you switched genders, it could be Robert Mueller throwing the hammer, but the two people that are actually more likely to bring down Trump are Nancy Pelosi and AOC.

    https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=1984+ibm+superbowl+ad&view=detail&mid=CC42221DBE5DB49A3F3BCC42221DBE5DB49A3F3B&FORM=VIRE


  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Robert Costa, Washington Post, March 2, 2019: We’re not going to turn on our own’: Republicans rally around Trump as threats mount

    I thought Robert Costa's article in the WP was good in providing examples of how Republicans have rallied around Trump to protect him. "Acquiescence to Trump is now the defining trait of the Republican Party."

    You can read his article at the above link, but it pretty well mimics what many other journalists are saying after observing Trump's speech at CPAC.

    Republicans put party first, and Trumpism defines what is now the Republican Party. Tribalism rules.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Schmidt Wrote:

    Robert Costa, Washington Post, March 2, 2019: We’re not going to turn on our own’: Republicans rally around Trump as threats mount

    I thought Robert Costa's article in the WP was good in providing examples of how Republicans have rallied around Trump to protect him. "Acquiescence to Trump is now the defining trait of the Republican Party."

    You can read his article at the above link, but it pretty well mimics what many other journalists are saying after observing Trump's speech at CPAC.

    Republicans put party first, and Trumpism defines what is now the Republican Party. Tribalism rules.

    Sorry but has become an dangerous "cult" which even "billionaires" and "evangelicals" support.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    The Washington Post has been documenting Trump's lies since he took office, and the count is now over 9,000.

    During his meandering blabbering at the CPAC convention, he made more than 100. Somebody in his inner circle should explain to him what STFU means.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Dutch -- Yes Trumpism could be called a cult. See this website on cult charateristics published by Apologetics Index. The characteristic have are excerpted from Take Back Your Life: Recovering from Cults and Abusive Relationships by Janja Lalich and Madeleine Tobias (Bay Tree Publishing).

    Apologetics Index: Characteristics of Cults

    The list is stated to be an analytical tool rather than a definitive list. Cults, of course, are often associated with relgious groups and the list has a religious undertone. Nevertheless, I have included and combined a few cult behaviors that might apply to Trumpism:

    Cults show excessively zealous and unquestioning commitment and subservience to its leader. Questioning, doubt, and dissent are discouraged or even punished in a cult. Cult leaders induce feelings of shame and/or guilt in order to influence and control members. Often this is done through peer pressure and subtle forms of persuasion.

    The cult itself is elitist, claiming a special, exalted status for itself, its leader(s), and its members (e.g., the leader is considered the Messiah, a special being, an avataror the group and/or the leader is on a special mission to save humanity). The "exalted status" teaches or implies that its supposedly exalted ends justify whatever means it deems necessary...participating in behaviors or activities they would have considered reprehensible or unethical (e.g., lying to family or friends).

    The cult has a polarized, us-versus-them mentality and the cult leader is not accountable to any authorities. Cult members are encouraged or required to live and/or socialize only with other cult members.

    The cult is preoccupied with making money.

    The most loyal cult members (the “true believers”) feel there can be no life outside the context of the group. They believe there is no other way to be, and often fear reprisals to themselves or others if they leave — or even consider leaving — the group.

    ================================

    Dutch...yes if these are traits of a cult, then Trumpism could be called a cult.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Thanks Schmidt; yes it is an"cult" which will be very hard to eradicate let alone "impeach". Not forgetting the "money" source and the "churches" to keep them in place.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Schmidt Wrote:

    Dutch -- Yes Trumpism could be called a cult.

    Yes, in the long game of political history, decades from now, what we are experiencing in 2019 will be studied in both legal and political classes as the largest cult ever. It won't be a debate if Trump was a (con man) cult leader, that will be accept as fact. It would be studied how millions of Americans were so easily conned into believing that Trump had any skills other than skills to con people. Hell, Trump likely can't program his own Tivo to record Fox News. He can't drive a car. He doesn't read anything longer than an single tweet. His depth of understanding on any topic is no greater than an average 10 year old. Bet he could not name the second president of the US, or the year WWII started, or the year it ended. I'd bet my house that Trump could not pass a GED test without cheating.... His entire adult life has been about "The Con" and the art of the con.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    My high level perspective of Trump during CPAC 2019 is that the more chaos, division, and confusion he can create, the better he feels about himself. It forces people to come down to his level because he is incapable of rising any higher than what we see before us.

    Trump thrives when he creates doubt as to what is right\wrong. He wants everyone to be walking around in a political fog where they can't see their own political hand in front of their face. He wants his base to question if sexually assaulting women is really a bad thing, he hints around the edges that maybe all women secretly love being sexually assaulted by powerful white men. As a Republication party they begin to ponder if they should embrace racism as being normal and healthy. Maybe the truth and facts too restrictive, where as telling lies has unlimited potential. Maybe Trump is right that success is leveraging the bad and rejecting the good. Maybe criminal behavior is a better, and more effective, way to get things done. Maybe laws and ethics are for losers. High stakes winners play outside the rules, walk over people who are in their way, and use people who are usable, find ways to win by cheating....

    ... Trump wants to create confusion so enough people are not clear about everything, thus open to being told what to believe.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Lawrence O'Donnell last night discussed the book, The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump: 27 Psychiatrists and Mental Health Experts Assess a President

    It was published in 2017 but is becoming more relevant every day Trump is in office. From the Amazon review:

    "In THE DANGEROUS CASE OF DONALD TRUMP, twenty-seven psychiatrists, psychologists, and other mental health experts argue that, in Mr. Trump’s case, their moral and civic “duty to warn” America supersedes professional neutrality. They then explore Trump’s symptoms and potentially relevant diagnoses to find a complex, if also dangerously mad, man.

    "Philip Zimbardo and Rosemary Sword, for instance, explain Trump’s impulsivity in terms of “unbridled and extreme present hedonism.” Craig Malkin writes on pathological narcissism and politics as a lethal mix. Gail Sheehy, on a lack of trust that exceeds paranoia. Lance Dodes, on sociopathy. Robert Jay Lifton, on the “malignant normality” that can set in everyday life if psychiatrists do not speak up.

    "His madness is catching, too. From the trauma people have experienced under the Trump administration to the cult-like characteristics of his followers, he has created unprecedented mental health consequences across our nation and beyond.

    "It’s not all in our heads. It’s in his."

    ==================================================

    It has already been discussed here when it was published, but some books never get old...