*** The Official MAGAposting thread ***

[wufwugy]

But you can't have it both ways. Or at least I'd argue that Trump trying to have it both ways is detrimental to our society.

What I mean is Trump likes to appeal to the cynic when he bullshits-- "it's how politics is played, I'm just better at it!" -- but the game is not played that way, the stability of the game relies on the bullshitters making their bullshit believable enough that they have plausible deniability. Citing made up shit in a discussion with a foreign head of state, ok, sure... but then openly bragging about it... That's ruinous to the game.

I don't deny that Trump personally can gain from this, but it's at all of our expense.

I may have a different view of what's being bullshitted. I'm getting at things like pacing and leading, thinking past the sale, etc.. The Amazon/tax thing may be an example of thinking past the sale. Let's say Trump's goal is to get people to talk about Amazon getting special tax treatment. I don't know if that is his goal, but let's go with it for now. If that is Trump's goal, how does he get people to talk about it? By thinking past the sale. How does he do that? The way that seems to work best in an arena of hostile media is telling a small lie that gets a reaction that assumes the sale. So, when Trump says Amazon is paying zero in sales tax, naysayers say "aha blumpf, it's these other taxes Amazon isn't paying, not sales tax." Little do they realize that they just confirmed the premise he wanted from the get-go.

I don't think the kind of lies Trump tells are the dangerous kind. They are the "honey you don't look fat in that dress" kind of lies. They're the kinds of lies that people tell (in attempts) to help others, like what a counselor might tell a client, or a parent might tell a child, or a friend might tell another friend.

If your Sweden is getting molested by its retarded migrant related policies, maybe telling a little lie about it that gets people to unwittingly confirm that Sweden is getting molested by its retarded migrant related policies is actually the right thing. It was fun when Trump did that. His simple lie got the entire world to affirm the truth they were trying to hide, at least for a brief period of time.

[BananaStand]

It was fun when Trump did that. His simple lie got the entire world to affirm the truth they were trying to hide, at least for a brief period of time.

SHIT HOLE

[Poopadoop]

I may have a different view of what's being bullshitted. I'm getting at things like pacing and leading, thinking past the sale, etc.. The Amazon/tax thing may be an example of thinking past the sale. Let's say Trump's goal is to get people to talk about Amazon getting special tax treatment. I don't know if that is his goal, but let's go with it for now. If that is Trump's goal, how does he get people to talk about it? By thinking past the sale. How does he do that? The way that seems to work best in an arena of hostile media is telling a small lie that gets a reaction that assumes the sale. So, when Trump says Amazon is paying zero in sales tax, naysayers say "aha blumpf, it's these other taxes Amazon isn't paying, not sales tax." Little do they realize that they just confirmed the premise he wanted from the get-go.

I don't think the kind of lies Trump tells are the dangerous kind. They are the "honey you don't look fat in that dress" kind of lies. They're the kinds of lies that people tell (in attempts) to help others, like what a counselor might tell a client, or a parent might tell a child, or a friend might tell another friend.

If your Sweden is getting molested by its retarded migrant related policies, maybe telling a little lie about it that gets people to unwittingly confirm that Sweden is getting molested by its retarded migrant related policies is actually the right thing. It was fun when Trump did that. His simple lie got the entire world to affirm the truth they were trying to hide, at least for a brief period of time.

Here's an alternate theory:

Trump is basically a random word generator. He says whatever pops into his head regardless of the context. The fact so much of it is untrue is because he doesn't filter it for truth - or at all. There's no overarching strategy behind it and its just as it appears to an observer: random blabbering.

[wufwugy]

Here's an alternate theory:

Trump is basically a random word generator. He says whatever pops into his head regardless of the context. The fact so much of it is untrue is because he doesn't filter it for truth - or at all. There's no overarching strategy behind it and its just as it appears to an observer: random blabbering.

I love this theory. Because it's testable!

Let's see if it has predictive power.

[boost]

I may have a different view of what's being bullshitted. I'm getting at things like pacing and leading, thinking past the sale, etc.. The Amazon/tax thing may be an example of thinking past the sale. Let's say Trump's goal is to get people to talk about Amazon getting special tax treatment. I don't know if that is his goal, but let's go with it for now. If that is Trump's goal, how does he get people to talk about it? By thinking past the sale. How does he do that? The way that seems to work best in an arena of hostile media is telling a small lie that gets a reaction that assumes the sale. So, when Trump says Amazon is paying zero in sales tax, naysayers say "aha blumpf, it's these other taxes Amazon isn't paying, not sales tax." Little do they realize that they just confirmed the premise he wanted from the get-go.

I don't think the kind of lies Trump tells are the dangerous kind. They are the "honey you don't look fat in that dress" kind of lies. They're the kinds of lies that people tell (in attempts) to help others, like what a counselor might tell a client, or a parent might tell a child, or a friend might tell another friend.

If your Sweden is getting molested by its retarded migrant related policies, maybe telling a little lie about it that gets people to unwittingly confirm that Sweden is getting molested by its retarded migrant related policies is actually the right thing. It was fun when Trump did that. His simple lie got the entire world to affirm the truth they were trying to hide, at least for a brief period of time.

I get that you're enamored with these persuasion tactics, and to be honest, I find them incredibly interesting myself, but I think you over value them and don't recognize their limits. In an ocean of functionally infinite business relationships that is the world of the developer/brand Trump was forty years ago, employing total persuasion (meaning all out, as in "total war") can reap great rewards and barely send a wave a couple miles in this vast ocean.

However, as the pool gets smaller, as it did as Trump became a bigger player, the waves become bigger and go further. Trump, circa Atlantic City, maybe was him splashing around in one of the Great Lakes as opposed to the ocean. Trump as president -- the world stage is a very small neighborhood and now he's sloshing around in a kiddie pool.

That is to say, these "white lies" as you see them, are only white lies when there's enough other activity to absorb the damage done by them.

[wufwugy]

That is to say, these "white lies" as you see them, are only white lies when there's enough other activity to absorb the damage done by them.

What damage?

[boost]

What damage?

Predicting what exactly the damage will be in the middle of the storm is not possible. That doesn't mean we can't know that tornadoes are bad.

That kinda gets at a point that I imagine may be fundamental to our disagreement here: I think lying is like violence (it's an analogy, I'm not SJWing here)-- there are times when what is on the other side of the equation is so bad that it's worth it, but it should be avoided at all costs and certainly should not be casually employed. It creates an inherently unstable platform from which to go forward, and in the case of lying specifically, this unstable platfrom is caused because lying is by definition a divergence from reality.

So, yeah, I don't grant that "no" is always the right answer to "do I look fat in this?" It's the easy answer, but the question is indicative of underlying problems in the individual posing the question, and offering the easy answer is indicative of the desire to avoid addressing tough situations in the relationship and thereby sweeping problems under the rug that are bound to surface in a worse way down the road.

The damage of "no, you don't look fat in it" may never be apparent, it may be very hard or impossible to link back to the seemingly benign white lie, but by examining both the question and the answer we can know that it is at best avoiding underlying issues and possibly exasperating them (she doesn't actually believe you..)

We don't need to wait for the crash, Trump is driving recklessly.