Help me understand this quote from D. Tump, Jr.

[Tresha91203]

Donald Trump Jr. made the following statement at a real estate conference in New York in 2008, saying “Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets.” He added, “we see a lot of money pouring in [to our businesses] from Russia.”

Does the above raise any eyebrows among Trump's acolytes?

You know the answer to that (bold) question is "no." They had all sorts of rational reasons not to vote for him and yet the totality of those reasons didn't disconcert Trumpkins enough to inspire them to vote for someone other than Trump.

It could not possibly mean his opponent was far worse overall, and particularly with respect to "Russian ties."

I can't speak to what it might have meant for those people. I can say only that it makes no rational sense to choose A over B when there exist choices C, D, E, F, etc., none of which present the reprehensible and sui generis set of dilemmas associated with choosing A or B.

That would be awesome! Unfortunately, we do not live in an ideal world. In our current reality, it's either A or B. This election proves that C, D, E and F have zero shot. A and B were universally hated, but A won the popular vote and B won the election. C and D didn't even place, despite A and B being vile pieces of shit.

I didn't vote for A or B...because neither of them deserved or earned my vote.

The lesser of two evils is still evil. Why choose an evil that could wreak havoc on oneself and millions of others when one doesn't have to do so? I may not have the best moral compass going, but it does at least work well enough for me not to succumb to that.

I get it. For me, there was a clear lesser evil. Knowing that one of the evils was going to win, I had to cast a vote against the bigger evil. In a tight race, my vote for C could have given the bigger evil the presidency. I really do understand your position. In a better world, I'd have done like you did. I just don't see any signs that this is that better world, and this election just confirms it for me.

 

[usmbguest5318]

You know the answer to that (bold) question is "no." They had all sorts of rational reasons not to vote for him and yet the totality of those reasons didn't disconcert Trumpkins enough to inspire them to vote for someone other than Trump.

It could not possibly mean his opponent was far worse overall, and particularly with respect to "Russian ties."

I can't speak to what it might have meant for those people. I can say only that it makes no rational sense to choose A over B when there exist choices C, D, E, F, etc., none of which present the reprehensible and sui generis set of dilemmas associated with choosing A or B.

That would be awesome! Unfortunately, we do not live in an ideal world. In our current reality, it's either A or B. This election proves that C, D, E and F have zero shot. A and B were universally hated, but A won the popular vote and B won the election. C and D didn't even place, despite A and B being vile pieces of shit.

I didn't vote for A or B...because neither of them deserved or earned my vote.

The lesser of two evils is still evil. Why choose an evil that could wreak havoc on oneself and millions of others when one doesn't have to do so? I may not have the best moral compass going, but it does at least work well enough for me not to succumb to that.

I get it. For me, there was a clear lesser evil. Knowing that one of the evils was going to win, I had to cast a vote against the bigger evil. In a tight race, my vote for C could have given the bigger evil the presidency. I really do understand your position. In a better world, I'd have done like you did. I just don't see any signs that this is that better world, and this election just confirms it for me.

Okay. I understand what you've said. I don't agree with it, but I understand how it is you see it as you do.

FWIW, but not to be critical of you, I don't espouse your approach to it for the following reasons:

• As we saw from the 2016 election's polling inaccuracy, there is no way to know whether voting for A, B, C or D would have led to the worst of the evils winning. It is quite possible that had voters done as I did, C or D may have become PEOTUS.
• We won't ever get closer to that better world if people don't act to make it be so. Of course, voting behavior is just one thing contributing to our arrival at that more enlightened place, but refusing to vote for dastardly candidates is a damn fine place to start.
• Were voters to withhold their approbation from despicable major party candidates, even if the final decision were to land in the US HoR, a very clear messages would be sent that voters are fed up and that even those representatives should commence acting in the better interests of the rank and file electorate instead of "big monied" organizations and individuals that fund their campaigns.
• Voting "off party" for Congressional seats should have happened too. On election day, Congress' approval rating was something around 10% - 15%, yet voters put damn near all of them back in office. I don't remotely understand why and how that happens....I have to assume it happens because people vote based on what Congressional incumbents say they want to do rather than based on whether they accomplished what they said they would. What other leadership body -- corporate board, non-profit organization, teachers, parents, etc. -- receives approval by their "constituents" when they don't get done what they say they are going to do?

 

[Tresha91203]

It could not possibly mean his opponent was far worse overall, and particularly with respect to "Russian ties."

I can't speak to what it might have meant for those people. I can say only that it makes no rational sense to choose A over B when there exist choices C, D, E, F, etc., none of which present the reprehensible and sui generis set of dilemmas associated with choosing A or B.

That would be awesome! Unfortunately, we do not live in an ideal world. In our current reality, it's either A or B. This election proves that C, D, E and F have zero shot. A and B were universally hated, but A won the popular vote and B won the election. C and D didn't even place, despite A and B being vile pieces of shit.

I didn't vote for A or B...because neither of them deserved or earned my vote.

The lesser of two evils is still evil. Why choose an evil that could wreak havoc on oneself and millions of others when one doesn't have to do so? I may not have the best moral compass going, but it does at least work well enough for me not to succumb to that.

I get it. For me, there was a clear lesser evil. Knowing that one of the evils was going to win, I had to cast a vote against the bigger evil. In a tight race, my vote for C could have given the bigger evil the presidency. I really do understand your position. In a better world, I'd have done like you did. I just don't see any signs that this is that better world, and this election just confirms it for me.

Okay. I understand what you've said. I don't agree with it, but I understand how it is you see it as you do.

FWIW, but not to be critical of you, I don't espouse your approach to it for the following reasons:

• As we saw from the 2016 election's polling inaccuracy, there is no way to know whether voting for A, B, C or D would have led to the worst of the evils winning. It is quite possible that had voters done as I did, C or D may have become PEOTUS.
• We won't ever get closer to that better world if people don't act to make it be so. Of course, voting behavior is just one thing contributing to our arrival at that more enlightened place, but refusing to vote for dastardly candidates is a damn fine place to start.
• Were voters to withhold their approbation from despicable major party candidates, even if the final decision were to land in the US HoR, a very clear messages would be sent that voters are fed up and that even those representatives should commence acting in the better interests of the rank and file electorate instead of "big monied" organizations and individuals that fund their campaigns.
• Voting "off party" for Congressional seats should have happened too. On election day, Congress' approval rating was something around 10% - 15%, yet voters put damn near all of them back in office. I don't remotely understand why and how that happens....I have to assume it happens because people vote based on what Congressional incumbents say they want to do rather than based on whether they accomplished what they said they would. What other leadership body -- corporate board, non-profit organization, teachers, parents, etc. -- receives approval by their "constituents" when they don't get done what they say they are going to do?

We "knew" HTC was going to win. There was "no path" for DJT. That's what I was working with. I totally agree that we need more viable parties and I'm practically at the "any means necessary" point. Its really defeating.

It boggles me that our Congressmen are so despised but hold their seats. Soooo frustrating. I would love a clean slate with no affiliation allowed!

 

[nat4900]

It boggles me that our Congressmen are so despised but hold their seats. Soooo frustrating. I would love a clean slate with no affiliation allowed!

Term limits is our ONLY way to really "drain that swamp", fully realizing that some decent people would also be gone, the re-election system is broken.

 

[jc456]

Donald Trump Jr. made the following statement at a real estate conference in New York in 2008, saying “Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets.” He added, “we see a lot of money pouring in [to our businesses] from Russia.”

Does the above raise any eyebrows among Trump's acolytes?

I thought global trade was what obummer wanted and why the Russia reset

 

[jc456]

Donald Trump Jr. made the following statement at a real estate conference in New York in 2008, saying “Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets.” He added, “we see a lot of money pouring in [to our businesses] from Russia.”

Does the above raise any eyebrows among Trump's acolytes?

The Master has forbidden the Trumpcultists from any eyebrow raising regarding the Trump crime family's affairs.

Obummer never said anything of the sort for you!