47 ms·
Trump
- potatoman2 10y agoDemagogic hate-monger seems a little strong.
- anotherhacker 10y agoIt's also redundant. Demagogs === hate-mongers.
- anotherhacker 10y agoSomeone downvoted my response. Perhaps because they think that they are not the same thing...I suggest looking at the definition of Demagog a little bit more. "synonyms:rabble-rouser, agitator, political agitator, soapbox orator, firebrand, fomenter, provocateur" A Demagog is someone who uses hate to bring attention to themselves. Would you call Mahatma Gandhi a demagog? Nope.
- diyorgasms 10y agoIf anything, I'd call that a charitable description, and definitely not as strongly worded as most would write.
- v64 10y agodemagogue: a political leader who seeks support by appealing to popular desires and prejudices rather than by using rational argument hatemonger: a person who kindles hatred, enmity, or prejudice in others "When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people." "In the Middle East, we have people chopping the heads off Christians, we have people chopping the heads off many other people. We have things that we have never seen before -- as a group, we have never seen before, what's happening right now. The medieval times -- I mean, we studied medieval times -- not since medieval times have people seen what's going on. I would bring back waterboarding and I'd bring back a hell of a lot worse than waterboarding." "I think Islam hates us. There's a tremendous hatred. We have to get to the bottom of it. There is an unbelievable hatred of us." I would say demagogic hatemonger is a perfectly accurate description of Donald Trump.
- siegecraft 10y agoAre there any non-demagogue politicians, then? Successful ones, I mean.
- fake-name 10y agoI really hope you're taking issue with some subtle issue with the phrasing, rather then the intent. With regard to the intent, I think it's too weak, if anything. "Sociopathic demagogic hate-monger", maybe.
- nanny 10y agoAnd personally I usually throw in "fascist" for good measure.
- GavinMcG 10y agoHardly. Demagoguery appeals to people's emotions and prejudices, rather than rational argument. There can be no doubt that Trump takes exactly such an approach. And he has vocally encouraged violence and identified specific groups to serve as targets, based on race and religion. That description is entirely apt.
- tomjen3 10y agoIf you are going to use that description, it will apply to every politician with modest success, however it is not what is commonly thought of as a demagogue, probably because something that applies to almost everybody is a meaningless adjective.
- GavinMcG 10y agoEncouraging violence? Appealing to emotion I'll grant – though not typically as exclusively as Trump has – but appealing to prejudice? Not seeing it.
- xlm1717 10y agoAlong with the lazy Nazi comparisons.
- blatant 10y agoTerry Tao recently did a post on the trump situation: https://terrytao.wordpress.com/2016/06/04/it-ought-to-be-common-knowledge-that-donald-trump-is-not-fit-for-the-presidency-of-the-united-states-of-america/ https://terrytao.wordpress.com/2016/06/04/it-ought-to-be-com... It is time to get serious.
- nolepointer 10y agoI think Terry should stick with math.
- weinzierl 10y agohttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11843318 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11843318
- powera 10y agoI still wonder if any large tech companies (Google, Apple, etc) will endorse against Trump before November. They did on Prop 8, and Trump will similarly have an immediate negative impact on many of their employees.
- kmiroslav 10y agoApple has already abandoned the RNC [1]. I'm disappointed that no other large companies have so far. [1] http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jun/18/trump-remarks-prompt-apple-abandon-rnc-report/ http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jun/18/trump-remark...
- Analemma_ 10y agoSeveral large companies have sharply withdrawn support from the RNC without abandoning it completely. Microsoft used to make monetary donations to them every election cycle, this year they are donating technical support to the convention but no money. YMMV on whether that's good/bad/enough.
- wsxiaoys 10y agoActually not. AFAIK, most Chinese H1B holders working in FLAG (Facebook, Linkedin, Amazon and Google) are either actively support Trump or strongly against Clinton. From their perspective, Trump is against illegal immigration while protect legal immigration visa holders. But from the company perspective, it's another story.
- diyorgasms 10y agoI have to wonder if these are Chinese immigrants who are loyal to the government in China and as such find Trump's strong authoritarian streak reminiscent of home.
- kmiroslav 10y agoThe only things Trump is right about are the exact same things that every politician says: > He's right that many Americans are getting screwed by the system. He’s right that the economy is not growing nearly fast enough. He's right that we're drowning in political correctness, and that broken campaign finance laws have bred a class of ineffective career politicians. It's demagoguery 101.
- chinhodado 10y agoTrump seems to be one of those rare politicians that hate political correctness though.
- smsm42 10y agoI would question the assumption that every politician says PC is something negative that we have too much of. Certainly I'd have hard time finding many left-wing politicians saying that.
- justjico 10y agoFor that you get people like Bill Maher...
- tomp 10y agoIf Hillary ever said anything similar to any of that, she would attract many Sanders (possibly even Trump) voters.
- Everhusk 10y ago> And without it, we’ll lose our position as the most powerful country in the world. Why is this a bad thing? Isn't the goal of globalization to start thinking of our planet as a whole?
- maxsavin 10y agoIf we slip we'll probably get beat down by everyone.
- VLM 10y agoShould Saudi Arabia have a voice equal to, or maybe superior to Massachusetts WRT gay rights or feminism?
- tomjen3 10y agoBecause America is a much more benevolent dictator than China, Putin or any other country.
- chokolad 10y agoPutin is not a country.
- AnimalMuppet 10y agoHe is now. Putin is Russia, and Russia is Putin.
- chokolad 10y agoMaybe to a westerner.
- selectron 10y agoAs an American, I care much more about the fate of America than I do about the fate of Europe. People are tribal animals.
- 10y ago
- rinon 10y agoThank you for writing this. So many want to tiptoe around and ignore this election, like they've always done before, and that may be the worst mistake of all in this situation.
- superswordfish 10y agoWith Trump already an also-ran in November, who may even have to run as an independent, it doesn't take much courage to write this now. It just became politically correct to slam Trump in public. If you wait too long, he'll have dropped out already! "Daddy, what did you do in the Great War?"
- BadassFractal 10y agoIt's been very interesting to follow this election cycle along with Sam Harris' podcasts. Would strongly recommend it, he's spoken in depth and very eloquently about the Trump situation: https://www.samharris.org/podcast https://www.samharris.org/podcast . Also the Rubin Report has been right in the thick of it, also another great source of non-mainstream coverage: https://www.youtube.com/user/RubinReport https://www.youtube.com/user/RubinReport
- TempleOS 10y ago15 years of CIA torture made me see the light -- fucken niggers.
- vox_mollis 10y agoTrump's casual racism, misogyny, and conspiracy theories are without precedent among major presidential nominees. It seems that sama needs to listen to the Nixon tapes.
- jeremyt 10y agoOr read a few paragraphs of Lyndon Johnson's biography.
- abglassman 10y ago"Casual" being the operative term here. Nixon et al had plenty to say behind closed doors that at least for the last generation or two, would not be tolerated by the decent voting public from a mainstream candidate with any hope of being elected. Trump is not only saying these things in public, on the record, but he's campaigning on them. He's a leader in misogyny and bigotry.
- clevernickname 10y agoI thought "pure politics" posts weren't allowed/were discouraged on HN? >dang 47 days ago >It isn't that it's pro-Trump, it's that it's pure politics. Such posts always get heavily flagged, and it's hard to disagree with that, since they're typically not posted to gratify intellectual curiosity. >Basic Income stories are political, but they aren't purely political. There's an intellectual interest in thinking about and debating such a major social change. Political horse race stories are the opposite.
- hackaflocka 10y agoSam A. and Paul G. should be allowed to post whatever they like.
- magicalist 10y ago> Such posts always get heavily flagged That says they get flagged, not that they aren't allowed. I have no doubt this post is getting many flags as we type.
- davidw 10y agoIt's now off the front page. I didn't flag it as it's their site, but I'm happier that it's gone.
- kafkaesq 10y agoIt's not "pure politics" in the sense that it's from the president of Y Combinator. And when he's talking about the need for people to no longer be silent he's referring to the circles he runs with (VCs, Bilderbergers, etc). So in that sense his statement his very relevant.
- ethanhunt_ 10y agoDisappointed to see Sam repeat things that are plainly false. Everyone says that Trump says such horrible things, but why is it that so often those same people have to misquote him to make it seem horrible? > He has said that a judge of Mexican descent couldn’t treat him fairly because of his heritage and that we should ban Muslims from entering the country. He said that a judge of Mexican descent isn't treating him fairly, and that it is probably because of his heritage. That's very different from saying that the judge can't treat him fairly because of his heritage. How could someone with Sam's command of language and attention to detail not see the difference? And where was the condemnation of the Obama admin when they tried to prohibit an Iranian-American judge from presiding over Iranian immigration cases? > He has accused Obama of somehow being responsible for the recent shooting in Orlando. The WP originally ran this headline and changed it because it was such a wild inference from what he actually said.
- potatoman2 10y agoGiven that many believe Trump to be literally Hitler, bending the facts is a small price to pay to stop him.
- maxsavin 10y agoThat's not how you stop someone like that. That's how you become them.
- ebbv 10y agoProbably nobody who is against Trump is bending any facts to try to stop him. The only one who has no respect for reality is Trump himself.
- throwanem 10y ago> Probably nobody who is against [a presidential candidate] is bending any facts to try to stop [him/her] Given the reality of 21st century electoral politics in the United States, I find it unsurprising, yet deeply disappointing all the same, that anyone actually believes this.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- hackaflocka 10y agoIf Colin Powell were to run on an independent ticket, who would the best running mate for him?
- tomjen3 10y agoSomebody who would shut him up whenever he claims Iraq had WMDs?
- bruceb 10y agoHe led us in to a war on BS. He has no chance and no base.
- mikeash 10y agoYes, pretty much the worst of both worlds there. The people who loved Bush will hate him for speaking out afterwards, and the people who hated Bush will hate him for being spineless and not speaking out when it actually might have mattered.
- colmvp 10y agoThank goodness none of the remaining candidates voted for that war and vehemently defended their decision till the late 2000s or they'd stand no chance in this race.
- anysz 10y ago#feelingit
- anysz 10y agoBeing positive lol, why the downvotes?
- kirinan 10y agoWhile I think Trump is a bad choice, I think comparing him to Hitler is overzealous and irresponsible. There are no doubt similarities between the two but Hitler wrote an entire book about the "Jewish Peril" and how it was destroying society and needed to be dealt with. It was clear that Hitler had an agenda that was anti-semetic, and the charisma/ability to execute on it. Trump is a racist and a bigot, but he is far from someone that would be able to implement a "Final Solution". By drawing the comparisons to Hitler, we oversell Trump and what he is and at the same time bring Hitler and his actions to a lower level which they never be at. We should sell Trump for what he is: someone who uses the racism and ignorance of the American people to cover up the fact that he has no idea what he is doing.
- creshal 10y ago> Trump is a racist and a bigot, but he is far from someone that would be able to implement a "Final Solution". Why? Hitler didn't implement it himself either, he had staff for that. He just told them to get cracking. (That doesn't mean Trump will, but dismissing the possibility for grounds of incompetency seems a too easy way out.)
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- kmiroslav 10y agoYou should take a look at how Hitler looked like in the early 30s as he was beginning his ascension toward Chancellorship. There are a lot more resemblances with Trump than you think.
- throwanem 10y agoThere really aren't. In any case, the same was said about George W. Bush during both his runs for the Oval Office, and while I don't say he was a particularly worthwhile president, in hindsight the Hitler comparison was every bit as erroneous as even an elementary knowledge of 20th century history would suggest.
- 10y ago
- hubert123 10y agoAnother liberal who hasnt understand Trump's appeal in the slightest. How you can put "political correctness is bad" and then say literally 2 sentences after that "he is a racist and a misogynist" I mean the level of brainwashing is amazing.
- aerovistae 10y agoHmm, okay. Continuing down this line of discussion, can you share with us some details on Trump's proposed solutions for the various economic and social problems we face?
- eknight15 10y agoIt's funny how candidates can just state problems to get people excited (e.g. Bring jobs back to America, We're getting screwed by the system, Break up the banks, etc.), and yet most people care so little about the solutions.
- wvenable 10y agoBecause problems are easy; even Altman and Trump can agree on the problems. It's also easy to look backwards -- we can see what the problems are and how they were caused but to look forward is to look into the unknown and unknowable. Also, people just like to complain. The most fervent supporters on both sides of the political spectrum are passionately complaining about something.
- whamlastxmas 10y agoEven if provided a plan to address an issue, it's very debatable whether the plan would work. There's no winning, the goal post can always be moved because there are no fool-proof plans. Having someone say "This is broken, I will do my best to fix it" is leaps and bounds better than 99% of politicians who pretend there is no problem. I will take someone who attempts and fails to fix a problem over the person saying there is no problem.
- maxsavin 10y agoWhile I agree with the sentiment of the post, I was surprised by some of the examples provided, because they are what the press said and not what Trump said. With that said, it's surprising what choices for President the most powerful country in the world has.
- weinzierl 10y ago> To anyone familiar with the history of Germany in the 1930s, it's chilling to watch Trump in action. [...] Demagogic hate-mongers lead down terrible paths. It would be particularly embarrassing for us to fall for this—we are a nation of immigrants, and we know that immigrants built this country (and Trump, of course, is the grandson of immigrants and married to an immigrant). As Hitler was Austrian, technically speaking, he was an immigrant too.
- creshal 10y agoOnly technically. Austria was historically always seen as part of the German nation, just not part of Germany-the-country for purely political reasons – first the Habsburgs didn't want to subjugate themselves to the Prussian upstarts, and when Austria-Hungary fell apart, the Entente forbade Austria to join Germany, but couldn't prevent the two from closely cooperating, nor the German population from accepting Austrians. So nobody saw him as a migrant. Only after WW2 did the countries and societies start to drift apart (to no small part due to Hitler's semi-forced Anschluss of Austria).
- kafkaesq 10y agoAs Hitler was Austrian, technically speaking, he was an immigrant too. Well, the Anschluß took care of that.
- hnal943 10y agoWhat's the point of writing this article now, after all of the legitimate candidates have fallen? What do you want us to do?
- rwallace 10y agoIf 'you' includes us non-Americans who are liable to be affected by US government policies: my suggestion would be to vote Libertarian. Sure, the Libertarian candidate won't win this election, but that's not the point. It's about what message you are sending, what incentives you are conveying, to both current and future politicians.
- mikeash 10y agoThis certainly doesn't match what I've seen. All the people who think Trump is unfit seem perfectly willing to say so. All of the people who support him seem to be completely sincere in their belief that Trump would make a good president. I don't see anyone giving any indication that they think Trump shouldn't be president, but that they're afraid to say so. There is no "charade," as the author puts it. It's possible that certain Republican leaders fit the description. But plenty of high-ranking Republicans have been willing to speak out against Trump, and those who endorse him mostly seem to be sincere about it. And of course everybody on the opposing side takes pretty much every opportunity to trash him (IMO rightfully so). What's scary about Trump isn't that people are unwilling to speak out against him. What's scary is that so many people actually want him to win. Trump isn't the problem, Trump is the most visible and frightening symptom of a massive wave of ignorance and insecurity among the American electorate. He's the blood in the stool. Speaking out about how bad the blood is won't really help, you need to go in and kill the cancer that's causing it.
- brwnll 10y agoNot sure where you're seeing that. Many prominent Republicans have endorsed Trump, but then denounce comment after comment Trump makes, without ever removing their endorsement of the candidate out of loyalty to the party.
- mikeash 10y agoThey might disagree with him on many things, but I don't think they think he's outright unfit. It seems to me that they still sincerely think he's the best choice when the other one is Clinton. In any case, it's the electorate that really matters, not the leadership. I don't see any prospective voters afraid to speak their mind. Trump supporters among the general population all seem to be completely sincere. Trump opposers are unafraid to declare it.
- mej10 10y ago> "He needs someone highly experienced and very knowledgeable because it's pretty obvious he doesn't know a lot about the issues," McConnell said of a running mate for the mogul. He doesn't say he is "unfit" because he can't -- How can you not think a comment like that from McConnell is pretty damning of Trump's abilities?
- jroseattle 10y agoGood post, Sam. It's much better that we break down the issues at hand and move beyond the name=good/bad binary discussion.
- ythl 10y agoGet this political crap off of HN
- colmvp 10y agoHonestly, I'm surprised to see such a political piece from YC, especially since most political links on HN get taken down within a few hours.
- bryanlarsen 10y agoThis one lasted less than half an hour on the front page, despite being written by the president of YC. Granted, that's about 29 minutes longer than other political posts last, but it's a pretty rough ride for something with > 200 upvotes.
- mindslight 10y agoIf there were a worthwhile contender, then perhaps I'd consider voting. As it is, I don't see how casting a vote for Johnson does anything more than legitimize the election and thereby our totalitarian democracy. And that's exactly what Trump and his rhetoric are - inevitable products of late-game democracy. If he does beat Shillary in the finals, it will at least be nice having most of my peers back to an anti-government slant like during the Bush years.
- AnimalMuppet 10y agoVoting for Johnson (or any third-party candidate) is a way of telling both major parties that they messed up in choosing their candidates. It's a message worth sending.
- dllthomas 10y agoRight. A missing vote could be anywhere on a spectrum from "these both suck so bad that I can't bear to vote for either" through "things are great, I think either candidate is fine, and I trust my fellow Americans to make the right call", plus a chance of laziness. A vote for a third party is clearly a vote not for either major party candidate.
- mindslight 10y agoExcept the stats trumpeted are "Percent for Demlican", "Percent for Repubocrat", and "Voter turnout". Increasing that third number just shows support for the state religion of totalitarian democracy. The parties didn't "mess up" choosing their candidates - the problem is the basis of their entire platform. To the extent that the Repubocrats feel entitled to the Libertarian votes and Demlican the Green, it only affects how much lip service they'll pay to get those votes. Either branch of The Party is not going to run a candidate who will eg dismantle the NSA or the federal reserve. Why would their owners suddenly want to buy pro-freedom positions and diminish their own power? I also think it's more self honest to be in the group of non-voters, and helps rebuke this extremely condescending attitude that non-voters are "apathetic". In actuality, they're all individuals who've made a rational decision that playing a rigged game is a waste of their time, regardless of how strongly they'll justify it. Silent fucking majority.
- aerovistae 10y agoTangential sidenote, Burke never said that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmund_Burke#False_quotations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmund_Burke#False_quotations
- zorpner 10y agoHe's right that we're drowning in political correctness... Trump's casual racism, misogyny, and conspiracy theories are without precedent... That's some impressive cognitive dissonance, sama. Those are two aspects of the same thought happening in Trump's mind. EDIT: Stewart Lee's smart (and amusing!) bit on the idea of "political correctness": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmsV1TuESrc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmsV1TuESrc
- JeremyBanks 10y agoWe understand that those are intwined in Trump's head. That's an expected consequence of his general lake of nuance.
- ivankirigin 10y agoSam, what do you think about YC companies whose founders support trump? Or on the other side Apple not supporting GOP convention?
- darod 10y agoBefore Hitler was around I wonder, who was used as the model of living evil.
- bryanlarsen 10y agoBiblical characters like Judas Iscariot, Pontius Pilate, or the Pharaoh of Exodus, who chose to endure 10 plagues rather than let the Hebrew people go. http://www.slate.com/articles/briefing/explainer/2011/10/hank_williams_jr_firing_who_was_the_rhetorical_worst_person_in_h.html http://www.slate.com/articles/briefing/explainer/2011/10/han...
- hackaflocka 10y agoThe British used Napoleon, I think (source newspaper cartoons from the 1700's and 1800's). Supposedly, to get them to eat quickly or to go to bed, they would frighten children by telling them that Napoleon would get them if they didn't.
- smoyer 10y agoThis year's race for president can be summed up easily by two well-known quotes (one in Sam's essay): Edmund Burke - "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." Albert Einstein - "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
- lucio 10y agofunny thing, the Burke one seems to be a misquote https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmund_Burke#False_quotations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmund_Burke#False_quotations
- mikeash 10y agoI'm pretty sure the Einstein one is as well. And really, I find that to be fairly stupid. If you consider it to be insane to do the same thing repeatedly expecting different results, then you'll never accomplish anything that requires long-term action. Try chopping down a tree or graduating from college with that attitude.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- droithomme 10y agoTrump is a very annoying obnoxious person. But he's not a mass killer or compulsive liar. He doesn't hold grudges, he makes deals. Clinton however has a grudge list of her enemies and there is a long history of her enemies getting knocked off. She's a narcissist, a psychopath, a bully, and she is bought and owned by corporations which don't believe in free trade or capitalism on an even playing surface, but believe publicly mitigated risk, privately held profit, and redistribution of wealth from the weak to the powerful, along with silencing of critics through dirty tricks and more. Trump is not Hitler. However, Clinton is definitely Stalin. Clinton will be the next President, that is an easily foreseeable inevitability. Following this, this country will be completely destroyed by her actions. There's no stopping her election. There is only preparing for the inevitable future. Whether Clinton (inevitable) or Trump (impossible) that future will be bleak for most.
- wvenable 10y ago> Following this, this country will be completely destroyed by her actions. I love how much hyperbole exists in the US election. It's like you don't believe you're electing the commander and chief of the military and someone who gets to veto congress but your actually electing the next God of America who will smite whomever doesn't worship them. It's absolutely crazy. Whomever gets elected, life will pretty much go on as it always has. I'm not saying that there are no differences but there won't be a dissolution of the Union or burning lakes of fire.
- ericlamb89 10y agoI am no Trump fan, but I noticed a couple of points that might be misguided or incomplete: 1. "Trump's casual racism, misogyny, and conspiracy theories are without precedent among major presidential nominees." -- I think this is probably a stretch. I would guess that many previous candidates were just as bad if not worse. It just so happens now that everything candidates say or tweet is recorded, played back, and ultimately scrutinized far more than in the past. 2. "We are a nation of immigrants, and we know that immigrants built this country (and Trump, of course, is the grandson of immigrants and married to an immigrant)." -- immigrants and slaves built this country
- justjico 10y ago1. I think there's ample evidence Trump is a pretty unusual major party candidate.
- curiousgal 10y agoFinally someone speaking up. Based on the plethora of bad news I keep reading about the US (CIA, FBI, ISPs, Hillary Clinton etc) which portray a very dark picture about Americans, one of them being taken advantage of by their own system. And yet no one doesn't seem to be doing anything and it makes them look egoistic so I really admire Sam for writing this. He has a lot to lose by voicing his concern and yet he's doing it.
- mikeash 10y agoI don't think he really has anything to lose. The government isn't going to do anything to him, even if Trump wins. And among his peers, I'm sure that criticizing Trump as being unfit for office is about as controversial as insulting the taste of Bud Light.
- curiousgal 10y agoI didn't mean it that sense. People in the US tend to always bring a person's employer into the picture whenever they disagree with said person's opinion. So his public opinion can affect ycombinator.
- mikeash 10y agoThe tech community as a whole is heavily anti-Trump, so this will only help his image there.
- curiousgal 10y agoUnderstandable.
- throwanem 10y ago> I take some risk by writing this Really? You're worried that the notoriously pro-Trump Silicon Valley is going to turn against YC over this?
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- irrational 10y agoI can't vote for Trump or Clinton. I'm planning on writing in Bernie Sanders, but I wonder if I should write in Bernard Sanders instead. Not that my vote will count, but does anyone know if it matters which form of his name I use?
- ohmeohmyohwhy 10y ago"This post is going to get me in trouble but I'm going to say it any way. Uhh Derr Derr Derrrrrrr" -- Sam Altman. Can someone please send a priest to exorcise the ghost of Gordon Gekko from Sam Altman's body? The power of christ compels you!
- ohmeohmyohwhy 10y ago"This post is going to get me in trouble but I'm going to say it any way. Uhh Derr Derr Derrrrrrr" -- Sam Altman. Can someone please send a priest to exorcise the ghost of Gordon Gekko from Sam Altman's body?
- lucio 10y ago> At least Trump is willing to talk about the fact that the US is not on an acceptable growth trajectory. The Big Truth in Trump’s slogan is “Again”—we do need a fundamental change to get back to where we were. Clinton’s dangerously bad Big Lie is that there’s no problem here at all. Is a pro-Trump or anti-Trump post? </socratic>
- spoiledtechie 10y agoOh how I am disparaged by Sam Altmans words. Not because they are wrong, but because they seem naive. Trump is right about the problem. His solutions are a more verbose than most. I am reminded of a quote "We must not paint with pale pastels, but with bold colors" Trump is using bold colors to address change. Mexican Judge - When has it not been heard that many white judges have shown prejudice against a black person or poorer individual. Its not a long shot to say another race can practice prejudice against a white man, when white men and white judges have been doing it for so long. I have seen many Bernie and Hillary supports cast hatred, throw eggs, beat up their fellow citizen in the name of democracy. Yet our leaders choose to say nothing. To down play it. But those same leaders look for support of those exact same people throwing the punches and the eggs. Why when choosing to bring up bold colors, do people float to Hitler and Germany? Its extremely hard to understand the reference when all it forces the reader to do is visualize the reference and then creating a connection between Trump and Hitler. Its horribly sad to see such a connection being made, when it seems the Writer, that being Sam, is naive on the issues of Hitler and Germany. Sam makes references to Immigrants. When in fact TRUMP supports immigrants. Make no mistake between the two. Trump is PRO IMMIGRANT. But he is also PRO-LEGAL IMMIGRANT. Sam makes another naive comment when he believes Trump is anti immigrant. I doubt he is aware, but there are millions of immigrants WAITING in LINE for a LEGAL way to enter the United States. When what is happening is the illegals choose to do it ILLEGALLY, and we say fuck it. Just give them status. No says Trump and No says America. Obey the laws FIRST. Then you can come in. Make no mistake, Trump is PRO immigrant. Just anti Illegal. No serious growth of economics? Cut Taxes, choose a tax plan, that CBO says will drastically cut out DEBT per taxpayer. That is $1,000,000 per family owed in debt. That is $1,000,000 owned per tax payer in debt. He has chosen his plan and its Sam's naive writing that describes it differently. With Trump, you MUST start reading between the lines. For every single time he has said he wants LEGAL immigration, he has said 100 times he wants to build a wall. Sam Altman is too naive within this article to read past main stream media. Its saddening that someone I respect soo much is not as intelligent politically as I would have hoped.
- VLM 10y ago"creating a connection between Trump and Hitler. Its horribly sad to see such a connection being made" We're raising a generation who will grow up associating the name Hitler with an outspoken New York City real estate developer who did nothing wrong. Which is a bit of a problem if a real Hitler ever comes along. Along the lines of "crying wolf" fairy tales. So lets say we get a guy in 20 years who really does want to put Jews in ovens. And the people are like "yeah yeah yeah, I've heard it all before, and Central Park is kinda cool and I like casinos and big skyscrapers so I'm not seeing a problem here" I'm not sure they understand trademark dilution as a concept. All tissues are Kleenex and they're all OK, all photocopiers are Xerox and they're all OK, all politicians to the right of Lenin are Hitlers and they're all OK, oh whoops a real Hitler slipped thru and now the ovens are getting stoked up, maybe that was a bad strategy after all. You have to realize I'm not old enough to be greatest-generation, but for decades of my life all I've heard is everyone's Hitler and its simply not been a problem. And nobody seems to agree with me that its a problem to propagandize that being Hitler is OK and normal and nothing bad happens because of him.
- mikeaz1 10y agoTrump supporter here. If Trump is not elected I will be very concerned for the future of this country. Not sure why any real American would not vote Trump.
- mkane848 10y agoPlease define "real American" for me[0] http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/No_True_Scotsman http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/No_True_Scotsman
- mikeaz1 10y agoAny American who wants prosperity and safety for our country
- mikeash 10y agoI believe that his proposals would spark trade wars which would deeply harm our prosperity. I believe that his economic ideas are not founded in reasoning but merely in what he thinks sounds good to his supporters. I believe that Trump is not a rational person, and that his decisions would be greatly harmful simply because they wouldn't be based on facts or reason. I don't think safety is much of an issue, because we're essentially invulnerable barring some radical change. I do think that Trump's policies could get a lot of non-Americans killed. My one comfort is that the president is not as powerful as people think he is, and Trump might not be able to actually do any of the things he wants to do. But on the other hand, the president can potentially wield soft power over the rest of government with great effectiveness, as we saw during the Bush years, so that's hardly a guarantee
- mkane848 10y agoAnd you legitimately believe that someone who doesn't support Trump doesn't care about the future of our country? You're throwing around an ideal that doesn't really have a black and white definition as a metric to create your us vs them battle, come on now. I'm not a Trump supporter but I certainly detest the political game of charging each side up against each other and neither being able to even BEGIN to comprehend how the other side of the aisle filled out.
- lefstathiou 10y agoBoth sides pointing fingers that the other is living in a reality distortion field. ## We are already in the midst of a global trade war that will have billions of dollars of impact on the US and impact the livlihoods of tens of thousands (or hundreds) of thousands of people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Websites_blocked_in_mainland_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Websites_blocked_in_mainland_C... http://money.cnn.com/2016/04/20/technology/google-android-lawsuit-europe/ http://money.cnn.com/2016/04/20/technology/google-android-la... http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/07/technology/eu-fines-microsoft-over-browser.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/07/technology/eu-fines-micros... ^^above or easy low hanging examples, there are dozens of cases across many industries ## Most people of Muslim nations are already not freely allowed to enter the US (ever try sponsoring an H1B?) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_Waiver_Program https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_Waiver_Program ^^making an expedient point here rather than typing up all the ways it is challenging for anyone outside of western Europe to travel to the US 3. governments have consistently posed the biggest threats to a free society. this one has broken major dangerous precedents https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/irs-admits-targeting-conservatives-for-tax-scrutiny-in-2012-election/2013/05/10/3b6a0ada-b987-11e2-92f3-f291801936b8_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/irs-admits-t... http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/05/26/more-than-40-secret-service-staff-disciplined-in-data-flap.html http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/05/26/more-than-40-secr... http://mashable.com/2014/06/05/edward-snowden-revelations/#d3ecZ30tkiqn http://mashable.com/2014/06/05/edward-snowden-revelations/#d...
- ch4s3 10y agoTo be fair you first link on point 3 is about the IRS having a new class of legal tax entity to regulate and not enough time or money to check all applications. So, they admittedly focused on anti-tax groups assuming they would be most likely to be in violation of tax code. Those groups just happened to be mostly conservative groups, and the IRS happened to be right, they caught a ton of them breaking the rules. For my tax dollars, I'm fine with the IRS targeting anti-tax groups, it makes sense and the evidence supported their judicious use of time and resources.Let's not forget these were/are shady 501(c)(4) meant to hide political donations.
- ebbv 10y agoAdmire that you felt the need to say something Sam, but unfortunately I don't think anything productive is going to come from it. If you really want to stop Trump, unfortunately at this point the only thing you can do is hold your nose support Clinton. The time where we had any other options unfortunately has passed.
- sremani 10y agoFor the love of 100 million people dead in Europe in a short span of 32 years. Please stop comparing every other 'Native Populist' to Hitler, Mussolini etc. The politics may look similar, yes, there is a racial undertone to it, but seriously, argue the facts not fiction. Comparing Trump to Hitler is intersection of intellectual overreach and laziness.
- aerovistae 10y agoDisagree. The comparison is between Trump and what Hitler seemed to be before he revealed himself in full as what he truly was. The analogy is completely sound. We are comparing to late 1920s Hitler, not 1940s hitler. It's an important distinction.
- whamlastxmas 10y agoMein Kampf was published in 1925 and outlined the vast majority of Hitler's beliefs and plans.
- AnimalMuppet 10y agoKeep in mind, though, that not everybody who sounded like late 1920s Hitler turned into 1940s Hitler. (Can't think of any counterexamples off the top of my head, but I suspect there are more who didn't than more who did.) But it's kind of like safety engineering: You plan for the worst possible accident, not for the happiest possible outcome. If Hitler is the worst possible outcome of electing Trump, that's bad enough that even Hillary looks good. Not that I could vote for Hillary, but I sure ain't voting for Trump.
- aerovistae 10y agoThe safety engineering analogy is exactly it.
- cinquemb 10y agoThe conditions that has enabled a Trump like persona's, won't go away… show up to a ballot booth as many times as you want… see how well that worked for greeks, and soon the british. Maybe a sprinkle of metadata drone strikes within the continental US might fix things… only to be expected eventually after what delightful gifts we giveth others abroad and at home these past hundreds of years, but lets not suggest that no matter who wins this election, we will only see more of what we have seen so far, and as we all know, arms manufactures in dire times will sell to all parties :P
- athinggoingon 10y ago> Trump's casual racism, misogyny, and conspiracy theories are without precedent among major presidential nominees. He has said that a judge of Mexican descent couldn’t treat him fairly because of his heritage Judge Gonzalo Curiel, the judge presiding over the Trump university case, is a member of the San Diego La Raza Lawyers Association. La Raza is a group that advocates for a path to citizenship for all illegal immigrants. > we should ban Muslims from entering the country. Trump wants to ban Muslims from majority Muslim countries that are currently involved in prolonged wars which makes a comprehensive background investigation impossible to do. > When his supporters beat up a homeless Hispanic man and cited Trump, he called them “very passionate”. You forgot to mention all of the Trump supporters that get chased and beat up by Mexican flag waving protesters. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/06/03/ugly-bloody-scenes-in-san-jose-as-protesters-attack-trump-supporters-outside-rally/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/06/0... http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/2016/06/02/trump-san-jose-rally-protesters/32639803/?AID=10709313&PID=6164151&SID=ipog6mhenz015ndv00dth http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/2... This by no means justifies violence on the Trump supporters side, but please do some research to find out the majority of the violence is perpetrated by the protesters that show up to Trump rallies and not the other way around. I can go on and dismantle every other premise in this article using data and logic, but I will stop here.
- kbenson 10y ago> > He has said that a judge of Mexican descent couldn’t treat him fairly because of his heritage > La Raza is a group that advocates for a path to citizenship for all illegal immigrants. What does that have to do with his heritage. There are people that believe that without Mexican descent. I believe it, and I'm not Mexican, and am not an immigrant, and neither are my parents. There are people of Mexican descent that don't believe in a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants (I know one). Reducing people's behavior to something fueled by ethnicity is racism. It is not appropriate to, even with the link pointed out, to assume that Curiel's view regarding immigration does not have basis in beliefs that are distinct from his heritage. It is not appropriate to then further use this as evidence for why he's ruling some way in his job without much more than a single case (and this assertion has nothing to do with racism or heritage). > Trump wants to ban Muslims from majority Muslim countries that are currently involved in prolonged wars which makes a comprehensive background investigation impossible to do. Freedom of religion is a constitutionally protected right. I don't see how this right can be protected if you filter possible future citizens based on religion.
- ch4s3 10y ago>we're drowning in political correctness I'm always curious when people say this, what do they actually mean? Is there a specific thing happening that I'm not aware of here? In all seriousness, what is Sam referring to here?
- nolepointer 10y agoSilencing other points of view. Safe spaces. Refusing to call radical Islam what it is. Just a few examples.
- ch4s3 10y agoOh please, demagogue of every stripe try to silence dissenting views. And you're really upset about safe spaces? Who cares if kids at liberal arts colleges want to shelter themselves from whatever bothers them about the world, they're hardly hurting anyone. And "radical Islam" vs. whatever else you want to call someone else's world view is really just a name. With respect to "radical Islam", it hardly tells you anything if you use the term. Are you talking about Salafism, Jihadist-Salafism, Wahhabism, various religiously tinged forms of Arab Nationalism, etc. They're all very different things and when you call them all "radicalism" you risk wiping away important nuances that inform better decision making. Mostly, I think the term "political correctness" is asinine. I've literally never met a single person who claimed to be trying to be "politically correct," I've only ever heard it used as a pejorative used to brush aside other people's opinions and concerns. Historically it mean holding the party line above reason and compassion, and was repurposed in the 1970's to mean to have "correct" political thinking. See a quote from the time "a man cannot be politically correct and a chauvinist, too." Hardly objectionable, really. The phrase was turned around in the 90's to mean loosely "liberal bias" or "liberal concerns" Not to be confused with Neoliberalism, but rather center-left American politics. The term has really become more of a dog whistle than anything useful or meaningful. It's mostly used in political commentary to mean that the user of the term disagrees with another party's assertion that a particularly phrase, policy, etc is the product of bigotry. For example: John makes a statement about Asian-Americans, and Mary calls the statement racist. Mark replies saying that John isn't a racist, Mary is just being politically correct. However, this is a logical fallacy, as Mark has not address the merit or content of Mary's critique. I guess my point is that "political correctness" isn't a problem, in my view the use of the term is a lazy rhetorical device. It is used when one has no interest in engaging criticism, or doesn't like being called out on being a demagogue.
- acconrad 10y agoSo we flag posts that are political opinion pieces but as soon as Sam Altman does it we're free to hit the front page and keep it up in perpetuity?
- bryanlarsen 10y agoThis fell off the front page in less than half an hour despite getting > 200 votes.
- effingwewt 10y agoEvery site has a hivemind of sorts, but HN really hates it being pointed out. I still roll my eyes at every source list that begins with [0].
- tomjen3 10y agoOh for fuck sake. Not another smart person who links Trump to Hitler. PG spends a third of his twitter feed making that comparison, it is getting tiresome. Back when Bush was president we (meaning the leftist groups I read) used to assume Bush would turn the US into a concentration camp, would institute military law, etc. We were certain that he wouldn't give up power to a black guy and just leave the White House peacefully. Death certain. Guess what? We were wrong. Now all I hear is "people who vote for Trump don't know what is good for them", "I can't believe people are stupid enough to believe what Trump says", "Trump is Hitler", etc - not to mention an air that if you don't agree with me, then you are part of the problem, because it is so obvious. These people aren't stupid, nor is Trump. There is a huge problem in America, you have islamists who are openly attacking western values and western people, but the left side of the political spectrum won't even acknowledge the problem, so like republicans on climate issues, they don't put solutions out for discussions, so, by default, you are left with whatever the other party suggests, in this case Trumps ban on immigration. There is a huge amount of people who feel cheated of the good jobs their parents and grandparents had and believe these have been sent overseas by the big corporations. Yes stopping immigration is a stupid idea, yes a 35% import tax is a bad thing for the economy, but what is Clintons alternative? Se won't even talk about these problems, so I guess more of the same? Sorry, not acceptable. Trumps solutions are bad, but they sound good and there are no alternatives, so of course he is going to win on that one. If you don't want Trump elected, you have to engage in the debate, you have to acknowledge the problems as his base sees them, at least long enough to convince them that his solutions aren't good.
- bryanlarsen 10y ago"but what is Clintons alternative?" lmgtfy: https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/ https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/ Except for being racist and anti-islamist, she talks a lot about all those problems and outlines proposals for all of them. You may disagree with many of her proposals (and I do), but to say she's not talking about them just goes to show how the debate has been hijacked by demagoguery.
- igorgue 10y agoLet's start with you guys Sam, stop taking money from Peter Thiel who's a Trump delegate.
- mikeaz1 10y ago> kill the cancer that's causing it This guy is calling Trump supporters like myself a cancer that needs to be killed. Who's the real nazi? We need Trump to fix this country and we need it fast
- floatgatenate 10y agoYou are, for supporting a nationalistic demagogue riding a wave of hateful xenophobia by exploiting people's suffering during an economic downturn. Next question.
- mikeaz1 10y agoHehe.. you guys are so funny. Nationalistic? True. Xenophobic? False. Just concerned about national security. Trump haters are a real joke
- twiceaday 10y agoThe word you are looking for is jingoistic. And denying that trump panders to xenophobes is laughable.
- MajorLOL 10y agoThis is a traditional attack line; Label your opponent, apply negative attributes to that label, dismiss all opposition as non-relevant. I guess this is the lefts compelling argument for voting for another Clinton?
- dang 10y agoPlease stop creating accounts to break the HN guidelines with. That's not ok, regardless of how badly someone else broke the rules.
- mikeash 10y agoActually, I'm calling the ignorance and insecurity a cancer that needs to be killed. Nice demonstration of the insecurity, though, good job.
- seky 10y ago"Being right about something" is a basic prerequisite to being a successful demagogue
- putaside 10y agoTerrible Godwin flamebait. Not disappointed, merely amused and surprised. If you can not make a statement about a politician without invoking Hitler and dictatorship, you should really reconsider speaking up. Indirectly you are calling Trump voters Nazi's. That is pretty damaging to debate and to democracy. First calling Trump right, then portraying him as a mastermind capable of murdering millions of people, is juggling the very same demagogic tricks you so despise. There is no need to demonize someone, when you can factually, and calmly, attack their xenophobic economy-damaging proposals. This is fighting fire with fire.
- pj_mukh 10y agoI don't understand this "You called me nazi-like so your arguments are invalid" argument. Clearly, in some situations the comparison is apt. Situations in which a potential leader is using the fear of the "other" to gain power is textbook Nazi and/or fascist behavior.
- internaut 10y ago> Situations in which a potential leader is using the fear of the "other" to gain power is textbook Nazi and/or fascist behavior. That would make everybody Nazis forever. Different groups have different outgroups. http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/09/30/i-can-tolerate-anything-except-the-outgroup/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/09/30/i-can-tolerate-anything...
- pj_mukh 10y agoThe 'otherness' in this regard is specifically with respect to religion/race/nationality, making the Nazi comparison even more apt. Just saying "the other political side will be terrible for our country" is not fascism, because yes, everybody does that.
- cerbasict12 10y agoWhat a cuck!
- throwanem 10y agoSilicon Valley couldn't do a better job endorsing Trump if he paid them for it. (Not that they'd need him to. But he wouldn't need to, either! Unless there's some money changing hands that Mr. Altman didn't disclose, this blog post got written for free.)
- menacingly 10y agoSomething that's becoming common (and predates trump) is to say "I don't want to get political, but issue <x> is a matter of morals and there is no room for debate" As things continue to polarize, the list of items that are "beyond politics" and considered too critical to avoid continues to grow. If you want to discuss politics, just discuss politics, but don't disguise it as a situation so outrageous that it somehow eclipses politics. Any time someone acts like they truly cannot comprehend why roughly half this country wants to vote in one way or another it just comes across as histrionic and inexperienced.
- internaut 10y agoIt's hard in this area not to say anything controversial. I agree there is no plan. Personally I believe we need to go back to first principals on the subject of governance. What does a government of the future look like? I appreciate that's a bit of an ask but my view is that the specter of civil conflict looms large over Europe, less so the United States. Since we're going to get change, we might as well have some productive alternatives in mind. Let us not forget that we're members of the same tribe.
- yanilkr 10y agoLets start with a very bad assumption that people mostly make rational choices and want good things to happen to themselves and their country fellows. In this assumption, people who support Trump do not see him the way his non-supporters see him. His non supporters see hateful things around Trump. They see xenophobia, they see his plain speaking as intellectually insufficient, they see his aggressive attitude as a risky behavior based on similarities with dictators. People who like him see him as someone who can speak politically incorrect like them and who has some wealth, success and power and hope that he might be the one that can represent them and do good. This is battle of people who want good to win at the end. This is where things turned bad and this would be a costly mistake. The people who hate him, took moral responsibility to stop him because they truly believe they are stopping next hitler. It was disturbing to see google getting in the mix and fix the auto suggestions and google news against trump. I believe that they believe that they are doing for the good of everyone. This in-general a very very bad and dangerous path to fix the election with media and tech firms leading the way to stop trump. Like someone said this is an American Spring. Many Americans feel left behind. Their anger and desire to thrive will turn to extreme conditions if they are suppressed longer. This is not particle physics where the projectile will stop abruptly because of the election, this is a wave and its physics is much different. Tech companies already lost their good will by mixing with NSA and now if they continue this path and use their privilege to stop suppressed people, it might take decades to regain that trust. We are the good guys, tech has to liberate people, we might be the next wall street if we directly involve in picking and choosing the rulers.
- tzs 10y ago> But Trump is wrong about the more important part: how to fix these problems. Many of his proposals, such as they are, are so wrong they’re difficult to even respond to. P. J. O'Rourke had an interesting take on those wrong proposals: "I have a little announcement to make ... I'm voting for Hillary. I am endorsing Hillary, and all her lies and all her empty promises. It's the second-worst thing that can happen to this country, but she's way behind in second place. She's wrong about absolutely everything, but she's wrong within normal parameters."
- pj_mukh 10y agoP.J O'Rourke is the best. Its sad more conservatives don't listen to proud conservative voices like him. As an avowed progressive, I would gladly talk about a compromise with him. Also, he's hilarious.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- jasonlaramburu 10y agoI think the real danger is that Trump pivots to the middle for the general election, and dupes moderate republicans into supporting him. Hitler also did this (i.e. started out very radical in the 30s, shifted to the middle to gain mass appeal, and then consolidated his power once in office).
- H0n3sty 10y ago>we are a nation of immigrants, and we know that immigrants built this country More precisely, our nation was built by pioneers. When they arrived in the US they had nearly no welfare programs to draw from. You can have a country with open immigration, and you can have a country with generous welfare, but you can't have both. http://cis.org/Welfare-Use-Immigrant-Native-Households http://cis.org/Welfare-Use-Immigrant-Native-Households
- liberte82 10y agoI'm a little shocked at how many Trump supporters are in this thread. Is Trump popular in the startup scene?
- H0n3sty 10y agoAmong some. Doing a startup isn't really a partisan issue.
- selectron 10y agoThe startup scene is primarily young, white and male. It isn't all that surprising that Trump has support among the startup scene. American tech workers are also particularly vulnerable to outsourcing and have suffered from the H1B program.
- argonaut 10y agoIt's an Internet thing. The Donald Trump subreddit on Reddit is extremely popular, I'm sure a bunch of them have moved over to this thread for a moment.
- r00fus 10y agoI'm going to say this - I think Trump supporters are definitely more vocal/outspoken. Kind of skews the response. If you could see upvotes on comments here, I think you'd see a more accurate picture of support strength.
- nolepointer 10y agoI feel like Sam really misrepresented Trump's views, but that's expected from someone who's opposed to him. At this point, nothing will convince me to not vote for Trump. I'm too concerned about national security and my fellow (legal) Americans losing their jobs.
- justjico 10y agoIsolationism and a trade war with Mexico and China will not create more jobs. A bravado leader will also likely not lead to a more stable (read: secure) world.
- smsm42 10y agoI am no fan of Trump (in fact, I think selecting Trump is a huge problem for Republican party and he's one of the worst candidates the GOP had lately), but the post seems to be repeatedly confusing actual Trump with media myth of Trump (not uncommon among both supporters and detractors, and somewhat excusable given how much media manipulation Trump engages in). No, Trump did not blame Obama in Orlando shooting. No, Trump is not future Hitler. No, Trump is most probably not a racist either (despite his extremely despicable and idiotic comments about Judge Curiel - but those probably are not driven by racism but rather by a primitive strategy of pre-spinning the future embarrassing loss of a class-action lawsuit). And probably not a misogynist either, despite his despicable and idiotic comments about Megyn Kelly and others, at least his record suggests otherwise. Yes, he's rude, he's boorish, he's a pompous and shameless liar, and he is as close to a conman as one can be without being actually convicted in any criminal case. He has a lot of real flaws. Too many for my taste (see above). Inventing imaginary ones is both unnecessary and does not makes anything better. One does not beat Trump by going down to his level. He is a champion at his level, it's not where you have a chance to beat him. P.S. And no, there's no risk in criticizing Trump, at least not higher than expressing any common political opinion. In fact, right now there's a measurable risk of supporting Trump - I've seen people beaten up for visiting Trump rally in the very city I live in - but if you do it over the internet, the risk is small. Though there has been personal destruction campaigns waged over the internet, I have yet to see one waged against someone for criticizing Trump. In fact, most of the press will be doing it with extreme vigor for next 5 months at least, and if Trump wins - for next 4 years with vigor not seen since the Bush times. Which for me may be one of the few positive things in Trump winning - at least we will not have anymore journalists drooling over the president and describing how they get something warm running down their leg each time they see him (or her, as it may happen in the alternative case). That's not what the press is supposed to be doing in a working democracy. The press should bite, not lick the hands of power.
- justjico 10y agoI agree with your "factual" statements about Trump, but keep in mind, the media is trying to hold him accountable not just for what he said, but for what he meant to say. Rubio didnt say Trump had a small penis, he just implied it. Saying Rubio never actually said that, in my view, is more dishonest than missquoting him with actually saying it. Trump, being a presumptive nominee has a really big megaphone. He should be able to convey a very clear message. When he says, Obama has something else going on, the media is right to press, so what exactly are you saying? And Trumps response is: people should fill in the blanks, I don't know. In other words, I agree politicians lie and exaggerate, and sometimes say things they don't mean to say, but they correct the message, move on. Trump doesn't, he doubles down. He cites completely crazy and outrageous conspiracy theories, again, correctly saying, "I heard" or "some people think"... that is complete bs. I hate Ted Cruz, yet I was outraged when he was, again, factually just saying a tabloid run a story claiming Ted's dad was involved in the JFK assassination. "I'm not saying he was involved, but some people think so, and nobody talks about it". Factually correct, yet completely insane coming from a presidential candidate.
- jasonlaramburu 10y agoIt will be interesting to look back on the comments of some Trump supporters here in 30 years (assuming HN is still around). I suspect history will paint them in a similar light to folks like George Wallace, who presented calm and calculated arguments in support of segregation.
- krambs 10y agoHow could anyone know what Trump stands for? It seems to change with every speech. He's a crude opportunist embarrassing our country every day. For someone so influential to lend him any sort of legitimacy is entirely reckless.
- billhendricksjr 10y agoThanks for a thought provoking post, Sam. It's good to challenge one's beliefs regularly. > He’s right that the economy is not growing nearly fast enough Can you share the data and rationale you used to come to this conclusion? I get there's a hugely growing and unjust divide between classes, but the macro economy seems pretty healthy. GDP growth has slowed [1], but it's positive and we're a much bigger economy (so harder to grow as fast). [1] http://www.multpl.com/us-gdp-growth-rate/table/by-year http://www.multpl.com/us-gdp-growth-rate/table/by-year
- piotrjurkiewicz 10y agoWhy isn't this submission [flagged], whereas every /non-anti-Trump/ political submission gets flagged here within few minutes?
- justjico 10y agoI just wanted to mention "climate change" as my personal biggest issue of this election, and I'm a bit surprised to not see it mentioned more often. Trump takes a radical position thinking that "climate change" is a Chinese conspiracy. How does smart Trump supporters even "argue" for that position? I understand we can debate the extend of actions immediately required, or many other things, but this anti-intellectual position, makes it impossible to have any sane conversation on the topic. This is why I also think anti-intellectualism is the worst thing that can happen to a democracy.
- graycat 10y agoAt http://qz.com/712518/im-going-to-say-something-very-unpopular-in-silicon-valley-trump-is-right-about-some-big-things/ http://qz.com/712518/im-going-to-say-something-very-unpopula... Sam Altman posted TRIUMPH OF EVIL about D. Trump. Here in the interest of better government for the US, I respond to Altman's post. Who am I? I've posted long and often at HN, especially on relatively technical topics in applied mathematics. I am doing an Internet information technology startup where the core of the work is some of my original applied math for higher quality information for the users. I am a US citizen with no connection with any political campaign. I live in the state of NY and there am registered as a Democrat. I've used the Internet to try to keep up on the race for President of the US (POTUS). Currently I intend to vote for Trump. > But Trump is wrong about the more important part: how to fix these problems. Well, from all I've seen, so far Trump's statements about the economy are generalities. Are those generalities bad? Apparently not: As of now, at http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/republican_delegate_count.html http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/repub... apparently on the first ballot in the Republican Convention in Cleveland in July, Trump will receive at least 1542 votes and, thus, comfortably over the 1237 he needs for the nomination. So, so far his economic plans, although just generalities, were part of a successful campaign. Maybe in the rest of the campaign Trump will provide more details. I hope he will. For Alman's claim that Trump is "wrong", Altman didn't mention anything, not specifics, not even generalities. So, there is no way for me to tell just why Altman believes that Trump is "wrong". > He is irresponsible in the way dictators are. Altman didn't give any specific case where Trump was "irresponsible". Being "in the way dictators are" doesn't mean much since I am sure that Altman, Trump, and all dictators are the same in that they eat, sleep, breathe, talk, and more. To have something critical about Trump, we need something more specific. > Trump’s casual racism, misogyny, and conspiracy theories are without precedent among major presidential nominees. I've read a lot about Trump and frequently read that Trump is racist and misogynist. Since I would be very concerned if Trump were those things, I've looked for solid evidence but so far have found none. The sources I read gave no solid evidence, and neither did Altman. The evidence I have found indicates that Trump is just the opposite from racist and misogynist. > He has said that a judge of Mexican descent isn’t treating him fairly because of his heritage and that we should ban Muslims from entering the country. I dispute the claim about Trump and the judge: From all I have seen, Trump believes the judge has treated him unfairly in the case. One Trump claim is that the case should have been dismissed on summary judgment. Another claim is that the case should have been dismissed when the lead plaintiff withdrew from the case. Then, with that unfair treatment, Trump asked why, why did the judge treat Trump unfairly? So, as at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWKmpB7SeNE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWKmpB7SeNE Trump said: > All I'm trying to do is figure out why I'm being treated so unfairly by a judge. And a lot of people agree with it. All I want to do, all I want to do is find out why I'm being treated so unfairly by a judge. In looking for an answer to this question, Trump noticed the judge's Mexican ancestry and political activities that conflict with some of Trump's positions on illegal immigration from Mexico. Trump concluded that those facts about that judge explain why the judge treated Trump unfairly. Trump never claimed that the a judge with Mexican ancestry would have to treat him unfairly. Instead Trump noticed that the judge DID treat Trump unfairly, asked why, and noticed the judge's ancestry and political activities. http://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trump-keeps-up-attacks-on-judge-gonzalo-curiel-1464911442 http://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trump-keeps-up-attacks-on... “I’m building a wall. It’s an inherent conflict of interest,” Mr. Trump said. At http://www.donaldjtrump.com/media/4-reasons-why-judge-curiel-in-trump-university-case-should-recuse-himself http://www.donaldjtrump.com/media/4-reasons-why-judge-curiel... there is much more detail on the case and why the judge should recuse himself from the case. If there is any racism here, it is from the judge. Indeed, if investigate a little, the judge is too close to some groups who want CA to be returned to Mexico and all persons in the US of Western European descent to return to Europe -- wildly racist. > To anyone familiar with the history of Germany in the 1930s, it’s chilling to watch Trump in action. Though I know intellectually it’s easy in hard economic times to rile people up with a hatred of outsiders, it’s still surprising to watch this happen right in front of us. Clearly from his many statements, Trump wants the US to enforce the long existing US laws on immigration, e.g., the laws that his wife Melania DID follow correctly. I've listened to nearly all of Trump's debate performances, speeches, and rallies, and what I have heard is that always or nearly so each time Trump says that we should stop illegal immigration he also says right away that he is for LEGAL immigration. "A hatred of outsiders" has nothing to do with the desire and need to enforce our immigration laws. That's enough, Sam. Sam, you blew it.