April Presidential Poll: Biden, Trump or ?

shemp · 16th April 2020, 07:56 AM

I'm going to run a poll each month down to the November election. This isn't to determine how this forum leans; I think we all pretty much know how that goes already. This is to see how support for each candidate changes from month-to-month. This poll runs through the end of the month, and I'll start a new one May 1.

BobTheCoward · 16th April 2020, 08:00 AM

I hope Biden wins. Because of that I'm going to bet money on Trump to win. But I can't in good conscience vote for him.

Resume · 16th April 2020, 08:11 AM

I voted Biden because I despise Trump both as a president and as a person. But the fact that the only two viable choices are old white men that have been accused of sexual assault really pisses me off.

Normally, when faced with two crummy (IMO) choices for any executive office, I write myself in, but like 2016, I can't waste my vote so frivolously.

BobTheCoward · 16th April 2020, 08:16 AM

Originally Posted by Resume

I voted Biden because I despise Trump both as a president and as a person. But the fact that the only two viable choices are old white men that have been accused of sexual assault really pisses me off.

Normally, when faced with two crummy (IMO) choices for any executive office, I write myself in, but like 2016, I can't waste my vote so frivolously.

Voting for the least bad is wasting it.

theprestige · 16th April 2020, 08:25 AM

Is this a poll asking who we want to win, or who we think will win?

Craig4 · 16th April 2020, 08:28 AM

It's going to be Biden. Biden is up in the Democrat Trifecta, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Michigan. He's neck and neck in Florida too. Biden can either win the Rust Belt or win Florida and any other swing state. DeSantis hurt Trump in Florida, with him publicly making decisions on Trump's lead and the WWE debacle.

Additionally, Trump can't do rallies in the age of Covid 19 and he's getting no bump from how's he handling the pandemic. He had a short-lived surge and is now tanking.

Trump should have taken a lesson from Winston Churchill. Churchill told the British people that he had nothing to offer them but blood, sweat and tears and loved him for it. Trump called Covid 19 a hoax and we all stopped paying attention to him.

shuttlt · 16th April 2020, 08:41 AM

Originally Posted by Craig4

Trump should have taken a lesson from Winston Churchill. Churchill told the British people that he had nothing to offer them but blood, sweat and tears and loved him for it. Trump called Covid 19 a hoax and we all stopped paying attention to him.

They'd be saying he was recklessly spreading panic and that it was racist because the blood, sweat and tears would disproportionately be African American.

applecorped · 16th April 2020, 05:02 PM

I'm putting my money on the finger penetrator

Shadowdweller · 16th April 2020, 08:25 PM

I think you're mostly going to learn the extent to which people care to answer your poll on a month to month basis here.

Craig4 · 16th April 2020, 08:36 PM

Originally Posted by shuttlt

They'd be saying he was recklessly spreading panic and that it was racist because the blood, sweat and tears would disproportionately be African American.

Well, true. You can't be Trump and then suddenly be Winston Churchill. That's the dumb ****'s problem though.

Roger Ramjets · 16th April 2020, 11:08 PM

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

I hope Biden wins. Because of that I'm going to bet money on Trump to win. But I can't in good conscience vote for him.

What if the election is called off. Do you lose your money?

I'm not declaring support for any candidate in case I jinx the result.

fishbob · 17th April 2020, 12:06 AM

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

Voting for the least bad is wasting it.

Voting for the least bad pretty much characterizes my entire 40+ years of participation in the electoral process. But I think protecting us from government by the most bad is not a waste.

Sideroxylon · 17th April 2020, 12:52 AM

A vote for non of the above is a vote for Trump.

Sideroxylon · 17th April 2020, 12:58 AM

Originally Posted by applecorped

I'm putting my money on the finger penetrator

You can’t vote for more than one candidate.

shuttlt · 17th April 2020, 01:09 AM

Originally Posted by Craig4

Well, true. You can't be Trump and then suddenly be Winston Churchill. That's the dumb ****'s problem though.

Pretty sure Churchill was seen as something of a dangerous ****-up prior to the war. The differences may not be that big.

Lurch · 17th April 2020, 02:45 AM

Originally Posted by shuttlt

Pretty sure Churchill was seen as something of a dangerous ****-up prior to the war. The differences may not be that big.

Boy. You're rejecting a lot in order to narrow down to the point of potentially inferring equivalence.

Yeah, Churchill's Gallipoli gamble was a bad one. His enthusiasms could lead to bad outcomes. But look at the character of the men, their motives, their work ethic. There is a yawning gulf.

shuttlt · 17th April 2020, 03:18 AM

Originally Posted by Lurch

Boy. You're rejecting a lot in order to narrow down to the point of potentially inferring equivalence.

Yeah, Churchill's Gallipoli gamble was a bad one. His enthusiasms could lead to bad outcomes. But look at the character of the men, their motives, their work ethic. There is a yawning gulf.

It wasn't just Gallipoli, but that is a big part of it. Their motives and character depend on who you ask and at what point in the story you ask them. Somehow despite being the prototypical great leader at the end of the story, one could easily have made the case for Churchill being a risk taking, alcoholic war-mongering nationalist motivated by personal glory, stoking conflict because of a need for money who hadn't realized that the world had changed around him.

I don't see anything from the example of Churchill that makes it impossible for Trump to be highly regarded 80 years from now. We have to wait for events to play out.

uke2se · 17th April 2020, 03:58 AM

Originally Posted by shuttlt

It wasn't just Gallipoli, but that is a big part of it. Their motives and character depend on who you ask and at what point in the story you ask them. Somehow despite being the prototypical great leader at the end of the story, one could easily have made the case for Churchill being a risk taking, alcoholic war-mongering nationalist motivated by personal glory, stoking conflict because of a need for money who hadn't realized that the world had changed around him.

I don't see anything from the example of Churchill that makes it impossible for Trump to be highly regarded 80 years from now. We have to wait for events to play out.

Churchill was all of that until his death. He was also an intelligent leader. Trump isn't. There's simply no comparison, and trying to force one is ludicrous. Trump won't be highly regarded in 80 years. Hopefully, and if there is any justice in the world, he will be in jail after finishing his term.

ETA: Churchill led people. Trump is a permission slip for ******** to behave as ********.

Craig4 · 17th April 2020, 04:05 AM

Originally Posted by shuttlt

It wasn't just Gallipoli, but that is a big part of it. Their motives and character depend on who you ask and at what point in the story you ask them. Somehow despite being the prototypical great leader at the end of the story, one could easily have made the case for Churchill being a risk taking, alcoholic war-mongering nationalist motivated by personal glory, stoking conflict because of a need for money who hadn't realized that the world had changed around him.

I don't see anything from the example of Churchill that makes it impossible for Trump to be highly regarded 80 years from now. We have to wait for events to play out.

The main impediment with the Stupid Bitch in Chief being highly regarded 80 years from now is that he's a complete failure.

shuttlt · 17th April 2020, 04:08 AM

Originally Posted by uke2se

Churchill ... was also an intelligent leader.

I'm not sure that is what people would have said in the 30s.

shuttlt · 17th April 2020, 04:15 AM

Originally Posted by Craig4

The main impediment with the Stupid Bitch in Chief being highly regarded 80 years from now is that he's a complete failure.

Perhaps, but the game isn't over. If we asked the question of Churchill in the 30s, or when the war was going badly... we'd get a different answer. The key thing is that he was correct about Germany, everything else stems from that. We have to see how China, Globalism, Climate Change, and a whole load of other things play out to know how Trump will be judged.

uke2se · 17th April 2020, 04:21 AM

Originally Posted by shuttlt

I'm not sure that is what people would have said in the 30s.

They most assuredly did not doubt that he could tie his shoe-laces. Not so with Trump.

uke2se · 17th April 2020, 04:24 AM

Originally Posted by shuttlt

Perhaps, but the game isn't over. If we asked the question of Churchill in the 30s, or when the war was going badly... we'd get a different answer. The key thing is that he was correct about Germany, everything else stems from that. We have to see how China, Globalism, Climate Change, and a whole load of other things play out to know how Trump will be judged.

No, because while Churchill had a vision and followed it, inspiring people to follow him, Trump has no vision and no plan. He's fumbling in the dark. Best case his only legacy will be a country that is a bit less than it was when he took over. There is simply no comparison between the two, aside for them both being elderly white (almost anyway) men. Making such a comparison is frankly insulting.

The_Animus · 17th April 2020, 04:40 AM

Originally Posted by Sideroxylon

A vote for non of the above is a vote for Trump.

I didn't vote in the poll, but this is literally false.

Garrison · 17th April 2020, 04:54 AM

Originally Posted by shuttlt

I'm not sure that is what people would have said in the 30s.

You mean when he wasn't leader but a mere back bench MP? Yes when Donald Trump was a mere candidate maybe you could delude yourself that he would be more presidential if he won, but we have had 3 1/2 years to evaluate his leadership qualities and he has none, indeed the best summation of his Presidential conduct is 'raving lunatic'.

shuttlt · 17th April 2020, 05:00 AM

Originally Posted by uke2se

No, because while Churchill had a vision and followed it, inspiring people to follow him,

Why didn't people follow him in the 30s? Isn't it more like he had been selling the same vision for quite a while and it was only when events proved him right and caused the establishment narrative to collapse that people came around.

Originally Posted by uke2se

Trump has no vision and no plan.

With respect to what? It seems pretty clear that there are competing visions of a globalist future with trans-national bodies, like the UN and the WHO and trump is selling a more localised, national vision. Is that not a vision? It might be the wrong vision, but it's a vision.

Originally Posted by uke2se

He's fumbling in the dark. Best case his only legacy will be a country that is a bit less than it was when he took over. There is simply no comparison between the two, aside for them both being elderly white (almost anyway) men. Making such a comparison is frankly insulting.

You are only saying that because Churchill ended up being proved correct about Germany and went on to be on the winning side in the war.

Nobody knows how these things are going to play out. If you insist on assuming that your side is correct about all the big issues, then I agree that with that assumption Trump will certainly prove to have been in the wrong.

shuttlt · 17th April 2020, 05:05 AM

Originally Posted by Garrison

You mean when he wasn't leader but a mere back bench MP? Yes when Donald Trump was a mere candidate maybe you could delude yourself that he would be more presidential if he won, but we have had 3 1/2 years to evaluate his leadership qualities and he has none, indeed the best summation of his Presidential conduct is 'raving lunatic'.

Everybody knew what Churchill's policies and views were. They'd also seen him in action. The only reason people were won around to him was because events and history shifted. He stayed pretty much the same, the exact same qualities that caused people to have a low opinion of him before the war caused people to have a high opinion after. The establishment view of how history was going to play out and judge everybody was proved wrong.

Half the voting population, give or take, disagrees with you about the President. If you axiomatically assume that history will judge you correct and them wrong, then there is really nothing more to be said.

Safe-Keeper · 17th April 2020, 05:13 AM

Originally Posted by shuttlt

I don't see anything from the example of Churchill that makes it impossible for Trump to be highly regarded 80 years from now.

No, just no. Trump can't change. There is no wise, honest, intelligent and reliable person in there that he just surpresses for whatever reason. The corona crisis shows this. If there was an adult in there somewhere, he would have come out by now.

Or, as Sam Harris put it: "Trump isn't hiding his light under a bushel. He's all bushel".

ETA: can't vote in US elections, but obviously Biden.

uke2se · 17th April 2020, 05:26 AM

Originally Posted by shuttlt

Everybody knew what Churchill's policies and views were. They'd also seen him in action. The only reason people were won around to him was because events and history shifted. He stayed pretty much the same, the exact same qualities that caused people to have a low opinion of him before the war caused people to have a high opinion after. The establishment view of how history was going to play out and judge everybody was proved wrong.

Half the voting population, give or take, disagrees with you about the President. If you axiomatically assume that history will judge you correct and them wrong, then there is really nothing more to be said.

I axiomatically assume history will judge them wrong. Besides, I don't believe half the voting population disagrees with me. Like I said, Trump is a permission slip, not a leader. They enjoy having permission to be racist douchebags. That doesn't mean they value Trump's leadership, but only what he allows them to do.

I will also keep pointing out how insulting it is, not only to Churchill and his surviving kin, but to the intelligence of everyone present that you keep comparing the wind bag occupying the White House with a flawed but generally competent man.

shuttlt · 17th April 2020, 05:29 AM

Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper

No, just no. Trump can't change.

Who said anything about change?

Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper

There is no wise, honest, intelligent and reliable person in there that he just surpresses for whatever reason.

I'm not sure how one would know this. To my mind his manner is functionally good for him and has got him to the Presidency. Why would he change it?

Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper

The corona crisis shows this. If there was an adult in there somewhere, he would have come out by now.

That doesn't seem to be a unanimous view. What gives you the Gods eye view here? People could easily have said the same thing about events in Churchill's life and felt just as justified.

Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper

Or, as Sam Harris put it: "Trump isn't hiding his light under a bushel. He's all bushel".

That may well be true. Sam Harris's views on Trump do seem to be an evolving story though.

BobTheCoward · 17th April 2020, 05:34 AM

Being able to still win when most people vote against you is a heck of an advantage.

uke2se · 17th April 2020, 05:35 AM

Originally Posted by shuttlt

Who said anything about change?

I'm not sure how one would know this. To my mind his manner is functionally good for him and has got him to the Presidency. Why would he change it?

That doesn't seem to be a unanimous view. What gives you the Gods eye view here? People could easily have said the same thing about events in Churchill's life and felt just as justified.

That may well be true. Sam Harris's views on Trump do seem to be an evolving story though.

I'd say a vast majority of the world's population sees Trump for what he is. You don't. I'd say you're in the minority.

I mean, if we are going to make an argumentum ad populum about the bleeding obvious.

I'll give you this: if Trumpism survives and goes on to be some sort of world-encompassing ideology in some kind of apocalyptic scenario, perhaps history will portray Trump favorably. In pretty much all other circumstances, there's little to no chance of that happening.

theprestige · 17th April 2020, 06:56 AM

Originally Posted by shuttlt

Pretty sure Churchill was seen as something of a dangerous ****-up prior to the war. The differences may not be that big.

Come on, man. Even I don't think they're in the same league.

shuttlt · 17th April 2020, 07:17 AM

Originally Posted by theprestige

Come on, man. Even I don't think they're in the same league.

I'm more saying that Churchill got lucky and that events are more important than anything else in how these leaders will be judged. If the War hadn't come along he would be remembered negatively. I think we'll have to wait quite a few decades to be really sure what Trump was right or wrong about and how it will all play out.

For me, I think they are so different in many ways that easy comparisons aren't really possible or useful. Churchill had many personal qualities that I personally find more appealing than Trump, but I'm not sure that that is the most important thing, I'm not planning on sleeping with either of them. Results and being right about the important questions of the day are what matters in a President and why we remember Churchill.

shuttlt · 17th April 2020, 07:30 AM

Originally Posted by uke2se

I'd say a vast majority of the world's population sees Trump for what he is. You don't. I'd say you're in the minority.

The vast majority of the worlds population put no effort whatsoever into considering the question.

Originally Posted by uke2se

I mean, if we are going to make an argumentum ad populum about the bleeding obvious.

I'm not using argumentum ad populum.

Originally Posted by uke2se

I'll give you this: if Trumpism survives and goes on to be some sort of world-encompassing ideology in some kind of apocalyptic scenario, perhaps history will portray Trump favorably. In pretty much all other circumstances, there's little to no chance of that happening.

I think you are assuming that your side is right about the important questions of the day. If this turns out to be the high watermark for Globalism, or that the next 50 years show that handing over production to China was a bad idea then maybe he will have been right about some of the important questions. That doesn't rely on global Trumpism.

Safe-Keeper · 17th April 2020, 08:12 AM

The comparison is do meaningless I wonder if it's just a "control the conversation" ploy. Say something weird, and voila, thread derailed.

I agree withuke2se, the only way Trump ends up regarded as a second Churchill is if the whole world undergoes a catastrophic shift towards the far right. Let us hope that doesn't happen.

shuttlt · 17th April 2020, 08:21 AM

Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper

The comparison is do meaningless I wonder if it's just a "control the conversation" ploy. Say something weird, and voila, thread derailed.

I agree withuke2se, the only way Trump ends up regarded as a second Churchill is if the whole world undergoes a catastrophic shift towards the far right. Let us hope that doesn't happen.

Or maybe if time proves him right on Globalism, China, the news media and other important stuff. Time will tell.

theprestige · 17th April 2020, 08:35 AM

Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper

The comparison is do meaningless I wonder if it's just a "control the conversation" ploy. Say something weird, and voila, thread derailed.

You wonder if Craig4 is trying to control the conversation and derail the thread?

Originally Posted by Craig4

Trump should have taken a lesson from Winston Churchill.

I know he has a strict policy of dealing dishonestly and unethically with Trump supporters, but why would he want to abuse the rest of you that way?

The Great Zaganza · 17th April 2020, 09:12 AM

I voted Trump because the safest way for Biden to lose is the assumption that he will win.

Safe-Keeper · 17th April 2020, 12:17 PM

I like seeing the Trump-to-Biden ratio in this thread. Makes me hope for a similar landslide in November.
Hey, a man can dream, can't he

.

Biden	64	83.12%
Trump	5	6.49%
None of the above, third party, Planet X, etc.	8	10.39%
Voters: 77. You may not vote on this poll

16th April 2020, 07:56 AM	#1
shemp a flimsy character...perfidious and despised Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: People's Democratic Republic of Planet X Posts: 40,827	April Presidential Poll: Biden, Trump or ? I'm going to run a poll each month down to the November election. This isn't to determine how this forum leans; I think we all pretty much know how that goes already. This is to see how support for each candidate changes from month-to-month. This poll runs through the end of the month, and I'll start a new one May 1.
	__________________ If being a twat was a TV show, Trump would be the boxed set. "...just as a magnet attracts iron filings, ~~Trump~~ shemp attracts, and is attracted to, louts." - George Will "[shemp is] a most notable coward, an infinite and endless liar, an hourly promise breaker, the owner of no one good quality." - Shakespeare Last edited by shemp; 16th April 2020 at 08:21 AM.

16th April 2020, 08:41 AM	#7
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314	Originally Posted by Craig4 Trump should have taken a lesson from Winston Churchill. Churchill told the British people that he had nothing to offer them but blood, sweat and tears and loved him for it. Trump called Covid 19 a hoax and we all stopped paying attention to him. They'd be saying he was recklessly spreading panic and that it was racist because the blood, sweat and tears would disproportionately be African American.
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314

16th April 2020, 05:02 PM	#8
applecorped Banned Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 20,145	I'm putting my money on the finger penetrator
applecorped Banned Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 20,145

16th April 2020, 08:25 PM	#9
Shadowdweller Graduate Poster Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 1,025	I think you're mostly going to learn the extent to which people care to answer your poll on a month to month basis here.
	Last edited by Shadowdweller; 16th April 2020 at 08:27 PM.

16th April 2020, 08:00 AM	#2
BobTheCoward Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 20,433	I hope Biden wins. Because of that I'm going to bet money on Trump to win. But I can't in good conscience vote for him.

16th April 2020, 08:11 AM	#3
Resume Troublesome Passenger Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 19,077	I voted Biden because I despise Trump both as a president and as a person. But the fact that the only two viable choices are old white men that have been accused of sexual assault really pisses me off. Normally, when faced with two crummy (IMO) choices for any executive office, I write myself in, but like 2016, I can't waste my vote so frivolously.

16th April 2020, 08:16 AM	#4
BobTheCoward Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 20,433	Originally Posted by Resume I voted Biden because I despise Trump both as a president and as a person. But the fact that the only two viable choices are old white men that have been accused of sexual assault really pisses me off. Normally, when faced with two crummy (IMO) choices for any executive office, I write myself in, but like 2016, I can't waste my vote so frivolously. Voting for the least bad is wasting it.

16th April 2020, 08:25 AM	#5
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 50,627	Is this a poll asking who we want to win, or who we think will win?

16th April 2020, 08:28 AM	#6
Craig4 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: I live in a swamp Posts: 22,873	It's going to be Biden. Biden is up in the Democrat Trifecta, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Michigan. He's neck and neck in Florida too. Biden can either win the Rust Belt or win Florida and any other swing state. DeSantis hurt Trump in Florida, with him publicly making decisions on Trump's lead and the WWE debacle. Additionally, Trump can't do rallies in the age of Covid 19 and he's getting no bump from how's he handling the pandemic. He had a short-lived surge and is now tanking. Trump should have taken a lesson from Winston Churchill. Churchill told the British people that he had nothing to offer them but blood, sweat and tears and loved him for it. Trump called Covid 19 a hoax and we all stopped paying attention to him.

16th April 2020, 08:36 PM	#10
Craig4 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: I live in a swamp Posts: 22,873	Originally Posted by shuttlt They'd be saying he was recklessly spreading panic and that it was racist because the blood, sweat and tears would disproportionately be African American. Well, true. You can't be Trump and then suddenly be Winston Churchill. That's the dumb ****'s problem though.

16th April 2020, 11:08 PM	#11
Roger Ramjets Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 5,377	Originally Posted by BobTheCoward I hope Biden wins. Because of that I'm going to bet money on Trump to win. But I can't in good conscience vote for him. What if the election is called off. Do you lose your money? I'm not declaring support for any candidate in case I jinx the result.
	__________________ We don't want good, sound arguments. We want arguments that sound good.

17th April 2020, 12:06 AM	#12
fishbob Seasonally Disaffected Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Chilly Undieville Posts: 7,280	Originally Posted by BobTheCoward Voting for the least bad is wasting it. Voting for the least bad pretty much characterizes my entire 40+ years of participation in the electoral process. But I think protecting us from government by the most bad is not a waste.
	__________________ "When you believe in things you don't understand, then you suffer . . . " - Stevie Wonder. "It looks like the saddest, most crookedest candy corn in an otherwise normal bag of candy corns." Stormy Daniels I hate bigots. Last edited by fishbob; 17th April 2020 at 12:08 AM.

17th April 2020, 12:52 AM	#13
Sideroxylon Featherless biped Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Aporia Posts: 24,468	A vote for non of the above is a vote for Trump.

17th April 2020, 12:58 AM	#14
Sideroxylon Featherless biped Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Aporia Posts: 24,468	Originally Posted by applecorped I'm putting my money on the finger penetrator You can’t vote for more than one candidate.

17th April 2020, 01:09 AM	#15
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314	Originally Posted by Craig4 Well, true. You can't be Trump and then suddenly be Winston Churchill. That's the dumb **'s problem though. Pretty sure Churchill was seen as something of a dangerous **-up prior to the war. The differences may not be that big.
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314

17th April 2020, 02:45 AM	#16
Lurch Graduate Poster Join Date: Sep 2016 Location: Ottawa Posts: 1,666	Originally Posted by shuttlt Pretty sure Churchill was seen as something of a dangerous ****-up prior to the war. The differences may not be that big. Boy. You're rejecting a lot in order to narrow down to the point of potentially inferring equivalence. Yeah, Churchill's Gallipoli gamble was a bad one. His enthusiasms could lead to bad outcomes. But look at the character of the men, their motives, their work ethic. There is a yawning gulf.

17th April 2020, 03:18 AM	#17
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314	Originally Posted by Lurch Boy. You're rejecting a lot in order to narrow down to the point of potentially inferring equivalence. Yeah, Churchill's Gallipoli gamble was a bad one. His enthusiasms could lead to bad outcomes. But look at the character of the men, their motives, their work ethic. There is a yawning gulf. It wasn't just Gallipoli, but that is a big part of it. Their motives and character depend on who you ask and at what point in the story you ask them. Somehow despite being the prototypical great leader at the end of the story, one could easily have made the case for Churchill being a risk taking, alcoholic war-mongering nationalist motivated by personal glory, stoking conflict because of a need for money who hadn't realized that the world had changed around him. I don't see anything from the example of Churchill that makes it impossible for Trump to be highly regarded 80 years from now. We have to wait for events to play out.
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314	Last edited by shuttlt; 17th April 2020 at 03:22 AM.

17th April 2020, 03:58 AM	#18
uke2se Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 14,181	Originally Posted by shuttlt It wasn't just Gallipoli, but that is a big part of it. Their motives and character depend on who you ask and at what point in the story you ask them. Somehow despite being the prototypical great leader at the end of the story, one could easily have made the case for Churchill being a risk taking, alcoholic war-mongering nationalist motivated by personal glory, stoking conflict because of a need for money who hadn't realized that the world had changed around him. I don't see anything from the example of Churchill that makes it impossible for Trump to be highly regarded 80 years from now. We have to wait for events to play out. Churchill was all of that until his death. He was also an intelligent leader. Trump isn't. There's simply no comparison, and trying to force one is ludicrous. Trump won't be highly regarded in 80 years. Hopefully, and if there is any justice in the world, he will be in jail after finishing his term. ETA: Churchill led people. Trump is a permission slip for ****** to behave as ******.
	__________________ Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list. "If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1 Last edited by uke2se; 17th April 2020 at 04:02 AM.

17th April 2020, 04:05 AM	#19
Craig4 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: I live in a swamp Posts: 22,873	Originally Posted by shuttlt It wasn't just Gallipoli, but that is a big part of it. Their motives and character depend on who you ask and at what point in the story you ask them. Somehow despite being the prototypical great leader at the end of the story, one could easily have made the case for Churchill being a risk taking, alcoholic war-mongering nationalist motivated by personal glory, stoking conflict because of a need for money who hadn't realized that the world had changed around him. I don't see anything from the example of Churchill that makes it impossible for Trump to be highly regarded 80 years from now. We have to wait for events to play out. The main impediment with the Stupid Bitch in Chief being highly regarded 80 years from now is that he's a complete failure.
	Last edited by Craig4; 17th April 2020 at 04:06 AM.

17th April 2020, 04:08 AM	#20
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314	Originally Posted by uke2se Churchill ... was also an intelligent leader. I'm not sure that is what people would have said in the 30s.
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314

17th April 2020, 04:15 AM	#21
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314	Originally Posted by Craig4 The main impediment with the Stupid Bitch in Chief being highly regarded 80 years from now is that he's a complete failure. Perhaps, but the game isn't over. If we asked the question of Churchill in the 30s, or when the war was going badly... we'd get a different answer. The key thing is that he was correct about Germany, everything else stems from that. We have to see how China, Globalism, Climate Change, and a whole load of other things play out to know how Trump will be judged.
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314	Last edited by shuttlt; 17th April 2020 at 04:16 AM.

17th April 2020, 04:21 AM	#22
uke2se Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 14,181	Originally Posted by shuttlt I'm not sure that is what people would have said in the 30s. They most assuredly did not doubt that he could tie his shoe-laces. Not so with Trump.
	__________________ Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list. "If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1

17th April 2020, 04:24 AM	#23
uke2se Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 14,181	Originally Posted by shuttlt Perhaps, but the game isn't over. If we asked the question of Churchill in the 30s, or when the war was going badly... we'd get a different answer. The key thing is that he was correct about Germany, everything else stems from that. We have to see how China, Globalism, Climate Change, and a whole load of other things play out to know how Trump will be judged. No, because while Churchill had a vision and followed it, inspiring people to follow him, Trump has no vision and no plan. He's fumbling in the dark. Best case his only legacy will be a country that is a bit less than it was when he took over. There is simply no comparison between the two, aside for them both being elderly white (almost anyway) men. Making such a comparison is frankly insulting.
	__________________ Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list. "If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1

17th April 2020, 04:40 AM	#24
The_Animus Illuminator Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 3,258	Originally Posted by Sideroxylon A vote for non of the above is a vote for Trump. I didn't vote in the poll, but this is literally false.
The_Animus Illuminator Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 3,258	__________________ Don't feed the trolls. Just ignore them.

17th April 2020, 04:54 AM	#25
Garrison Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: UK Posts: 5,567	Originally Posted by shuttlt I'm not sure that is what people would have said in the 30s. You mean when he wasn't leader but a mere back bench MP? Yes when Donald Trump was a mere candidate maybe you could delude yourself that he would be more presidential if he won, but we have had 3 1/2 years to evaluate his leadership qualities and he has none, indeed the best summation of his Presidential conduct is 'raving lunatic'.
	__________________ So I've started a blog about my writing. Check it out at: http://fourth-planet-problem.blogspot.com/ And my first book is on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B077W322FX

17th April 2020, 05:00 AM	#26
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314	Originally Posted by uke2se No, because while Churchill had a vision and followed it, inspiring people to follow him, Why didn't people follow him in the 30s? Isn't it more like he had been selling the same vision for quite a while and it was only when events proved him right and caused the establishment narrative to collapse that people came around. Originally Posted by uke2se Trump has no vision and no plan. With respect to what? It seems pretty clear that there are competing visions of a globalist future with trans-national bodies, like the UN and the WHO and trump is selling a more localised, national vision. Is that not a vision? It might be the wrong vision, but it's a vision. Originally Posted by uke2se He's fumbling in the dark. Best case his only legacy will be a country that is a bit less than it was when he took over. There is simply no comparison between the two, aside for them both being elderly white (almost anyway) men. Making such a comparison is frankly insulting. You are only saying that because Churchill ended up being proved correct about Germany and went on to be on the winning side in the war. Nobody knows how these things are going to play out. If you insist on assuming that your side is correct about all the big issues, then I agree that with that assumption Trump will certainly prove to have been in the wrong.
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314

17th April 2020, 05:05 AM	#27
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314	Originally Posted by Garrison You mean when he wasn't leader but a mere back bench MP? Yes when Donald Trump was a mere candidate maybe you could delude yourself that he would be more presidential if he won, but we have had 3 1/2 years to evaluate his leadership qualities and he has none, indeed the best summation of his Presidential conduct is 'raving lunatic'. Everybody knew what Churchill's policies and views were. They'd also seen him in action. The only reason people were won around to him was because events and history shifted. He stayed pretty much the same, the exact same qualities that caused people to have a low opinion of him before the war caused people to have a high opinion after. The establishment view of how history was going to play out and judge everybody was proved wrong. Half the voting population, give or take, disagrees with you about the President. If you axiomatically assume that history will judge you correct and them wrong, then there is really nothing more to be said.
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314	Last edited by shuttlt; 17th April 2020 at 05:07 AM.

17th April 2020, 05:13 AM	#28
Safe-Keeper Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Norway Posts: 10,396	Originally Posted by shuttlt I don't see anything from the example of Churchill that makes it impossible for Trump to be highly regarded 80 years from now. No, just no. Trump can't change. There is no wise, honest, intelligent and reliable person in there that he just surpresses for whatever reason. The corona crisis shows this. If there was an adult in there somewhere, he would have come out by now. Or, as Sam Harris put it: "Trump isn't hiding his light under a bushel. He's all bushel". ETA: can't vote in US elections, but obviously Biden.
	__________________ "He's like a drunk being given a sobriety test by the police after being pulled over. Just as a drunk can't walk a straight line, Trump can't think in a straight line. He's all over the place."--Stacyhs "If you are still hung up on that whole words-have-meaning thing, then 2020 is going to be a long year for you." --Ladewig

17th April 2020, 05:26 AM	#29
uke2se Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 14,181	Originally Posted by shuttlt Everybody knew what Churchill's policies and views were. They'd also seen him in action. The only reason people were won around to him was because events and history shifted. He stayed pretty much the same, the exact same qualities that caused people to have a low opinion of him before the war caused people to have a high opinion after. The establishment view of how history was going to play out and judge everybody was proved wrong. Half the voting population, give or take, disagrees with you about the President. If you axiomatically assume that history will judge you correct and them wrong, then there is really nothing more to be said. I axiomatically assume history will judge them wrong. Besides, I don't believe half the voting population disagrees with me. Like I said, Trump is a permission slip, not a leader. They enjoy having permission to be racist douchebags. That doesn't mean they value Trump's leadership, but only what he allows them to do. I will also keep pointing out how insulting it is, not only to Churchill and his surviving kin, but to the intelligence of everyone present that you keep comparing the wind bag occupying the White House with a flawed but generally competent man.
	__________________ Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list. "If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1 Last edited by uke2se; 17th April 2020 at 05:27 AM.

17th April 2020, 05:29 AM	#30
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314	Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper No, just no. Trump can't change. Who said anything about change? Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper There is no wise, honest, intelligent and reliable person in there that he just surpresses for whatever reason. I'm not sure how one would know this. To my mind his manner is functionally good for him and has got him to the Presidency. Why would he change it? Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper The corona crisis shows this. If there was an adult in there somewhere, he would have come out by now. That doesn't seem to be a unanimous view. What gives you the Gods eye view here? People could easily have said the same thing about events in Churchill's life and felt just as justified. Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper Or, as Sam Harris put it: "Trump isn't hiding his light under a bushel. He's all bushel". That may well be true. Sam Harris's views on Trump do seem to be an evolving story though.
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314

17th April 2020, 05:34 AM	#31
BobTheCoward Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 20,433	Being able to still win when most people vote against you is a heck of an advantage.

17th April 2020, 05:35 AM	#32
uke2se Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 14,181	Originally Posted by shuttlt Who said anything about change? I'm not sure how one would know this. To my mind his manner is functionally good for him and has got him to the Presidency. Why would he change it? That doesn't seem to be a unanimous view. What gives you the Gods eye view here? People could easily have said the same thing about events in Churchill's life and felt just as justified. That may well be true. Sam Harris's views on Trump do seem to be an evolving story though. I'd say a vast majority of the world's population sees Trump for what he is. You don't. I'd say you're in the minority. I mean, if we are going to make an argumentum ad populum about the bleeding obvious. I'll give you this: if Trumpism survives and goes on to be some sort of world-encompassing ideology in some kind of apocalyptic scenario, perhaps history will portray Trump favorably. In pretty much all other circumstances, there's little to no chance of that happening.
	__________________ Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list. "If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1 Last edited by uke2se; 17th April 2020 at 05:37 AM.

17th April 2020, 06:56 AM	#33
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 50,627	Originally Posted by shuttlt Pretty sure Churchill was seen as something of a dangerous ****-up prior to the war. The differences may not be that big. Come on, man. Even I don't think they're in the same league.

17th April 2020, 07:17 AM	#34
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314	Originally Posted by theprestige Come on, man. Even I don't think they're in the same league. I'm more saying that Churchill got lucky and that events are more important than anything else in how these leaders will be judged. If the War hadn't come along he would be remembered negatively. I think we'll have to wait quite a few decades to be really sure what Trump was right or wrong about and how it will all play out. For me, I think they are so different in many ways that easy comparisons aren't really possible or useful. Churchill had many personal qualities that I personally find more appealing than Trump, but I'm not sure that that is the most important thing, I'm not planning on sleeping with either of them. Results and being right about the important questions of the day are what matters in a President and why we remember Churchill.
shuttlt Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,314	Last edited by shuttlt; 17th April 2020 at 07:23 AM.