Trump Support Highest Among American Workers since FDR - 60%+

[Pogo]

1. "Harsh language" is irrelevant. One screens that out. What's relevant is, in the case of "rapists", the fatally fallacious logic, in this case blanket generalization, which tells me he's an unabashed panderer. Panderers insult my intelligence, and they should be insulting yours too. And in the case of "closing mosques" a blatant disregard for the Constitution, which is literally the first thing a POTUS has to swear to preserve, protect and defend at literally the moment he or she takes office. That Rump expresses this degree of contempt for the framework this country is built on is enough, all by itself, to disqualify him from consideration. That simple enough?

None of that involves "dislike"; that element comes in with the attention-whoring and irrepressible self-inflation. I have zero respect for that. Actually less than zero. Far into negative numbers. Insofar as it's relevant to a candidate it reveals a man with as he would say "lots of problems", not the least of which is a hopeless insecurity and self-centredness that does not bode well for any leader of anything.

2. Pointless. Rump can do something new and start articulating some policies, rather than shovel after shovel of pandering bullshit, but it's too late for that because see number 1.

3. As noted -- doublethink lives. Cops are supposed to be The Law, and obviously I question how they administer it a lot. The MSM is not an "authority figure" by any definition at all. And I question that too -- it makes up most of what I do here whenever somebody posts an absurd link expecting readers to be as gullible as the OP was. My record on that is also a mile long.

1. It's simple. It's just not convincing considering the blanket generalizations and complete disrespect for the Constitution from the Left with nary a whimper from ANY lefties, from slaming Christians, Working Class White, SOutherns, ect, OR Gun Control, Affirmative Action, Eminent Domain, Restrictions on Speech, Mandatory Voluntarism, ect.

2. Trumps policies are new and fresh. Shockingly so. He is challenging long standing Consensus on serious issues and making no bones about it. Why are you afraid to admit that?

3. Not for liberals they aren't. A liberal questioning a cop is about as much of questioning Authority as a conservative questioning what a well known pot head has to say about legalizing marijuana. Your Authority figures are different than mine.

And you managed to question them when they told you something that you didn't want to believe it true?

When you really need to question them is when they tell you what you want to hear. Like the idea that Trump has no policies.

I guess it's hard for some people to tell the difference between elucidating policy and vague postering.

Wow. Still playing stupid.

INcredible.

I'm pretty sure you're not playing, since you can't name even one single so called policy that Trump has publicly detailed during his faux campaign.

And now more dishonesty.

Why are you so determined to avoid anything of substance?

You mean like the OP did by referring to a "poll" that forgot to exist?

 

[Liminal]

1. "Harsh language" is irrelevant. One screens that out. What's relevant is, in the case of "rapists", the fatally fallacious logic, in this case blanket generalization, which tells me he's an unabashed panderer. Panderers insult my intelligence, and they should be insulting yours too. And in the case of "closing mosques" a blatant disregard for the Constitution, which is literally the first thing a POTUS has to swear to preserve, protect and defend at literally the moment he or she takes office. That Rump expresses this degree of contempt for the framework this country is built on is enough, all by itself, to disqualify him from consideration. That simple enough?

None of that involves "dislike"; that element comes in with the attention-whoring and irrepressible self-inflation. I have zero respect for that. Actually less than zero. Far into negative numbers. Insofar as it's relevant to a candidate it reveals a man with as he would say "lots of problems", not the least of which is a hopeless insecurity and self-centredness that does not bode well for any leader of anything.

2. Pointless. Rump can do something new and start articulating some policies, rather than shovel after shovel of pandering bullshit, but it's too late for that because see number 1.

3. As noted -- doublethink lives. Cops are supposed to be The Law, and obviously I question how they administer it a lot. The MSM is not an "authority figure" by any definition at all. And I question that too -- it makes up most of what I do here whenever somebody posts an absurd link expecting readers to be as gullible as the OP was. My record on that is also a mile long.

1. It's simple. It's just not convincing considering the blanket generalizations and complete disrespect for the Constitution from the Left with nary a whimper from ANY lefties, from slaming Christians, Working Class White, SOutherns, ect, OR Gun Control, Affirmative Action, Eminent Domain, Restrictions on Speech, Mandatory Voluntarism, ect.

2. Trumps policies are new and fresh. Shockingly so. He is challenging long standing Consensus on serious issues and making no bones about it. Why are you afraid to admit that?

3. Not for liberals they aren't. A liberal questioning a cop is about as much of questioning Authority as a conservative questioning what a well known pot head has to say about legalizing marijuana. Your Authority figures are different than mine.

And you managed to question them when they told you something that you didn't want to believe it true?

When you really need to question them is when they tell you what you want to hear. Like the idea that Trump has no policies.

I guess it's hard for some people to tell the difference between elucidating policy and vague postering.

Wow. Still playing stupid.

INcredible.

I'm pretty sure you're not playing, since you can't name even one single so called policy that Trump has publicly detailed during his faux campaign.

And now more dishonesty.

Why are you so determined to avoid anything of substance?

Feel free to present the evidence that could substantiate your claims.

 

[Correll]

1. It's simple. It's just not convincing considering the blanket generalizations and complete disrespect for the Constitution from the Left with nary a whimper from ANY lefties, from slaming Christians, Working Class White, SOutherns, ect, OR Gun Control, Affirmative Action, Eminent Domain, Restrictions on Speech, Mandatory Voluntarism, ect.

2. Trumps policies are new and fresh. Shockingly so. He is challenging long standing Consensus on serious issues and making no bones about it. Why are you afraid to admit that?

3. Not for liberals they aren't. A liberal questioning a cop is about as much of questioning Authority as a conservative questioning what a well known pot head has to say about legalizing marijuana. Your Authority figures are different than mine.

And you managed to question them when they told you something that you didn't want to believe it true?

When you really need to question them is when they tell you what you want to hear. Like the idea that Trump has no policies.

I guess it's hard for some people to tell the difference between elucidating policy and vague postering.

Wow. Still playing stupid.

INcredible.

I'm pretty sure you're not playing, since you can't name even one single so called policy that Trump has publicly detailed during his faux campaign.

And now more dishonesty.

Why are you so determined to avoid anything of substance?

You mean like the OP did by referring to a "poll" that forgot to exist?

Have you ever questioned it when a liberal Authority has told you what you wanted to hear?

 

[Correll]

1. It's simple. It's just not convincing considering the blanket generalizations and complete disrespect for the Constitution from the Left with nary a whimper from ANY lefties, from slaming Christians, Working Class White, SOutherns, ect, OR Gun Control, Affirmative Action, Eminent Domain, Restrictions on Speech, Mandatory Voluntarism, ect.

2. Trumps policies are new and fresh. Shockingly so. He is challenging long standing Consensus on serious issues and making no bones about it. Why are you afraid to admit that?

3. Not for liberals they aren't. A liberal questioning a cop is about as much of questioning Authority as a conservative questioning what a well known pot head has to say about legalizing marijuana. Your Authority figures are different than mine.

And you managed to question them when they told you something that you didn't want to believe it true?

When you really need to question them is when they tell you what you want to hear. Like the idea that Trump has no policies.

I guess it's hard for some people to tell the difference between elucidating policy and vague postering.

Wow. Still playing stupid.

INcredible.

I'm pretty sure you're not playing, since you can't name even one single so called policy that Trump has publicly detailed during his faux campaign.

And now more dishonesty.

Why are you so determined to avoid anything of substance?

Feel free to present the evidence that could substantiate your claims.

What claims?

That you have admitted to be ignorant of the policies of a politician you hate?

THat you have ignored the many posters who have provided those policies for you and continued to dishonest pretend to be ignorant?

This thread is full of your behavior doing just that.

 

[JimBowie1958]

You mean like the OP did by referring to a "poll" that forgot to exist?

Trump will most likely be, God Willing, our next President.


You might as well get a head start on all your crying now, like you have been doing.

Cant blame you entirely.

 

[Pogo]

I guess it's hard for some people to tell the difference between elucidating policy and vague postering.

Wow. Still playing stupid.

INcredible.

I'm pretty sure you're not playing, since you can't name even one single so called policy that Trump has publicly detailed during his faux campaign.

And now more dishonesty.

Why are you so determined to avoid anything of substance?

You mean like the OP did by referring to a "poll" that forgot to exist?

Have you ever questioned it when a liberal Authority has told you what you wanted to hear?

I don't even know what the fuck a "liberal Authority" is supposed to be, but I question everything.

Including why you completely ignored the post above.

"Authority" isn't a political entity.

 

[Slyhunter]

1. Harsh language directed at people violating our laws and our sovereignty is imo, not a reason to dislike someone. That you do, is an actual reason, such as it is, finally, but you still haven't been able to articulate any of his policies that you don't like.

2. The policies are there. THey have been spoon fed to you . That you still play dumb is just proof of what a dishonest ass you are.

3. Cops aren't your Authority Figure moron. They are your enemy. It is not impressive that you "question" them. You moron. You ever question the pap the MSM feeds you?

1. "Harsh language" is irrelevant. One screens that out. What's relevant is, in the case of "rapists", the fatally fallacious logic, in this case blanket generalization, which tells me he's an unabashed panderer. Panderers insult my intelligence, and they should be insulting yours too. And in the case of "closing mosques" a blatant disregard for the Constitution, which is literally the first thing a POTUS has to swear to preserve, protect and defend at literally the moment he or she takes office. That Rump expresses this degree of contempt for the framework this country is built on is enough, all by itself, to disqualify him from consideration. That simple enough?

None of that involves "dislike"; that element comes in with the attention-whoring and irrepressible self-inflation. I have zero respect for that. Actually less than zero. Far into negative numbers. Insofar as it's relevant to a candidate it reveals a man with as he would say "lots of problems", not the least of which is a hopeless insecurity and self-centredness that does not bode well for any leader of anything.

2. Pointless. Rump can do something new and start articulating some policies, rather than shovel after shovel of pandering bullshit, but it's too late for that because see number 1.

3. As noted -- doublethink lives. Cops are supposed to be The Law, and obviously I question how they administer it a lot. The MSM is not an "authority figure" by any definition at all. And I question that too -- it makes up most of what I do here whenever somebody posts an absurd link expecting readers to be as gullible as the OP was. My record on that is also a mile long.

1. It's simple. It's just not convincing considering the blanket generalizations and complete disrespect for the Constitution from the Left with nary a whimper from ANY lefties, from slaming Christians, Working Class White, SOutherns, ect, OR Gun Control, Affirmative Action, Eminent Domain, Restrictions on Speech, Mandatory Voluntarism, ect.

2. Trumps policies are new and fresh. Shockingly so. He is challenging long standing Consensus on serious issues and making no bones about it. Why are you afraid to admit that?

3. Not for liberals they aren't. A liberal questioning a cop is about as much of questioning Authority as a conservative questioning what a well known pot head has to say about legalizing marijuana. Your Authority figures are different than mine.

And you managed to question them when they told you something that you didn't want to believe it true?

When you really need to question them is when they tell you what you want to hear. Like the idea that Trump has no policies.

I guess it's hard for some people to tell the difference between elucidating policy and vague postering.

Wow. Still playing stupid.

INcredible.

I'm pretty sure you're not playing, since you can't name even one single so called policy that Trump has publicly detailed during his faux campaign.

seal the border
increase funding for VA medical
Repatriation holiday.
etc.
It's been spelled out to you multiple times.

You want detail specifics click here --> Donald Trump on the Issues

 

[Liminal]

I guess it's hard for some people to tell the difference between elucidating policy and vague postering.

Wow. Still playing stupid.

INcredible.

I'm pretty sure you're not playing, since you can't name even one single so called policy that Trump has publicly detailed during his faux campaign.

And now more dishonesty.

Why are you so determined to avoid anything of substance?

Feel free to present the evidence that could substantiate your claims.

What claims?

That you have admitted to be ignorant of the policies of a politician you hate?

THat you have ignored the many posters who have provided those policies for you and continued to dishonest pretend to be ignorant?

This thread is full of your behavior doing just that.

In other words: You have no idea about any of Trump's so called policies.

 

[Liminal]

1. "Harsh language" is irrelevant. One screens that out. What's relevant is, in the case of "rapists", the fatally fallacious logic, in this case blanket generalization, which tells me he's an unabashed panderer. Panderers insult my intelligence, and they should be insulting yours too. And in the case of "closing mosques" a blatant disregard for the Constitution, which is literally the first thing a POTUS has to swear to preserve, protect and defend at literally the moment he or she takes office. That Rump expresses this degree of contempt for the framework this country is built on is enough, all by itself, to disqualify him from consideration. That simple enough?

None of that involves "dislike"; that element comes in with the attention-whoring and irrepressible self-inflation. I have zero respect for that. Actually less than zero. Far into negative numbers. Insofar as it's relevant to a candidate it reveals a man with as he would say "lots of problems", not the least of which is a hopeless insecurity and self-centredness that does not bode well for any leader of anything.

2. Pointless. Rump can do something new and start articulating some policies, rather than shovel after shovel of pandering bullshit, but it's too late for that because see number 1.

3. As noted -- doublethink lives. Cops are supposed to be The Law, and obviously I question how they administer it a lot. The MSM is not an "authority figure" by any definition at all. And I question that too -- it makes up most of what I do here whenever somebody posts an absurd link expecting readers to be as gullible as the OP was. My record on that is also a mile long.

1. It's simple. It's just not convincing considering the blanket generalizations and complete disrespect for the Constitution from the Left with nary a whimper from ANY lefties, from slaming Christians, Working Class White, SOutherns, ect, OR Gun Control, Affirmative Action, Eminent Domain, Restrictions on Speech, Mandatory Voluntarism, ect.

2. Trumps policies are new and fresh. Shockingly so. He is challenging long standing Consensus on serious issues and making no bones about it. Why are you afraid to admit that?

3. Not for liberals they aren't. A liberal questioning a cop is about as much of questioning Authority as a conservative questioning what a well known pot head has to say about legalizing marijuana. Your Authority figures are different than mine.

And you managed to question them when they told you something that you didn't want to believe it true?

When you really need to question them is when they tell you what you want to hear. Like the idea that Trump has no policies.

I guess it's hard for some people to tell the difference between elucidating policy and vague postering.

Wow. Still playing stupid.

INcredible.

I'm pretty sure you're not playing, since you can't name even one single so called policy that Trump has publicly detailed during his faux campaign.

seal the border
increase funding for VA medical
Repatriation holiday.
etc.
It's been spelled out to you multiple times.

You want detail specifics click here --> Donald Trump on the Issues

The link provides a nearly interesting collection of superficial one liners......more evidence that Trump doesn't know what he stands for or why.

 

[Liminal]

Trump's candidacy should be known as Revenge of the Birthers.

 

[Liminal]

FDR ... in 1936? You mean after he'd already been elected and spent a term doing something about the Depression --- and you want to compare that with a TV attention whore who's in not-even-an-election-year.

Yes, cretin, Trump is as popular as FDR was AFTER FDR had time to win that support after several years in office.

Try to imagine, I know it will be hard for you, but try to imagine how much support Trump could have after several years in office.

I actually have to take you by the hand and explain this?

Assessment of somebody's activity in office, when there is effectively only one alternative, is a completely different thing from running around with one's combover on fire yelling "they're rapists". You've got a blatant apples-to-oranges here.

Does bring up an interesting contrast though:

FDR: "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself"
RUMP: "They're rapists!"

Quite the contrast indeed.

Trump is a birther; that fact alone disqualifies him from serious consideration for high public office.

 

[Correll]

Wow. Still playing stupid.

INcredible.

I'm pretty sure you're not playing, since you can't name even one single so called policy that Trump has publicly detailed during his faux campaign.

And now more dishonesty.

Why are you so determined to avoid anything of substance?

You mean like the OP did by referring to a "poll" that forgot to exist?

Have you ever questioned it when a liberal Authority has told you what you wanted to hear?

I don't even know what the fuck a "liberal Authority" is supposed to be, but I question everything.

Including why you completely ignored the post above.

"Authority" isn't a political entity.

THen you really need to give that some thought, buddy.

Because you obviously have NOT questioned this time around when they told you what you wanted to hear about the REpublican Frontrunner.

And indeed, even as evidence contrary to what they told you is spoon fed to you, you still are actively ignoring it so as to hew to what you have been told to believe.

 

[Correll]

Wow. Still playing stupid.

INcredible.

I'm pretty sure you're not playing, since you can't name even one single so called policy that Trump has publicly detailed during his faux campaign.

And now more dishonesty.

Why are you so determined to avoid anything of substance?

Feel free to present the evidence that could substantiate your claims.

What claims?

That you have admitted to be ignorant of the policies of a politician you hate?

THat you have ignored the many posters who have provided those policies for you and continued to dishonest pretend to be ignorant?

This thread is full of your behavior doing just that.

In other words: You have no idea about any of Trump's so called policies.

Sly just gave you some more right about. Plenty of other posters are wasting their time presenting you with information for you to ignore.

I didn't claim anything about Trumps Policies. I asked you and POGO which of them you considered the most stupid.

And neither of you were able to come up with squat.

And you both are too dim or too dishonest to see how bad that makes you look.

 

[Correll]

1. It's simple. It's just not convincing considering the blanket generalizations and complete disrespect for the Constitution from the Left with nary a whimper from ANY lefties, from slaming Christians, Working Class White, SOutherns, ect, OR Gun Control, Affirmative Action, Eminent Domain, Restrictions on Speech, Mandatory Voluntarism, ect.

2. Trumps policies are new and fresh. Shockingly so. He is challenging long standing Consensus on serious issues and making no bones about it. Why are you afraid to admit that?

3. Not for liberals they aren't. A liberal questioning a cop is about as much of questioning Authority as a conservative questioning what a well known pot head has to say about legalizing marijuana. Your Authority figures are different than mine.

And you managed to question them when they told you something that you didn't want to believe it true?

When you really need to question them is when they tell you what you want to hear. Like the idea that Trump has no policies.

I guess it's hard for some people to tell the difference between elucidating policy and vague postering.

Wow. Still playing stupid.

INcredible.

I'm pretty sure you're not playing, since you can't name even one single so called policy that Trump has publicly detailed during his faux campaign.

seal the border
increase funding for VA medical
Repatriation holiday.
etc.
It's been spelled out to you multiple times.

You want detail specifics click here --> Donald Trump on the Issues

The link provides a nearly interesting collection of superficial one liners......more evidence that Trump doesn't know what he stands for or why.

The top policy is this "Ban late abortions; exceptions for rape, incest or health.".


That's a pretty clear abortion policy. What more do you need to know? What "deeper" information is missing?

 

[Slyhunter]

1. It's simple. It's just not convincing considering the blanket generalizations and complete disrespect for the Constitution from the Left with nary a whimper from ANY lefties, from slaming Christians, Working Class White, SOutherns, ect, OR Gun Control, Affirmative Action, Eminent Domain, Restrictions on Speech, Mandatory Voluntarism, ect.

2. Trumps policies are new and fresh. Shockingly so. He is challenging long standing Consensus on serious issues and making no bones about it. Why are you afraid to admit that?

3. Not for liberals they aren't. A liberal questioning a cop is about as much of questioning Authority as a conservative questioning what a well known pot head has to say about legalizing marijuana. Your Authority figures are different than mine.

And you managed to question them when they told you something that you didn't want to believe it true?

When you really need to question them is when they tell you what you want to hear. Like the idea that Trump has no policies.

I guess it's hard for some people to tell the difference between elucidating policy and vague postering.

Wow. Still playing stupid.

INcredible.

I'm pretty sure you're not playing, since you can't name even one single so called policy that Trump has publicly detailed during his faux campaign.

seal the border
increase funding for VA medical
Repatriation holiday.
etc.
It's been spelled out to you multiple times.

You want detail specifics click here --> Donald Trump on the Issues

The link provides a nearly interesting collection of superficial one liners......more evidence that Trump doesn't know what he stands for or why.

It shows his policies the same as Hillary's web site shows hers. You are a hypocrite expecting more from those who disagree with you than you get from those you agree with.

 

[Correll]

I guess it's hard for some people to tell the difference between elucidating policy and vague postering.

Wow. Still playing stupid.

INcredible.

I'm pretty sure you're not playing, since you can't name even one single so called policy that Trump has publicly detailed during his faux campaign.

seal the border
increase funding for VA medical
Repatriation holiday.
etc.
It's been spelled out to you multiple times.

You want detail specifics click here --> Donald Trump on the Issues

The link provides a nearly interesting collection of superficial one liners......more evidence that Trump doesn't know what he stands for or why.

It shows his policies the same as Hillary's web site shows hers. You are a hypocrite expecting more from those who disagree with you than you get from those you agree with.

All that matters to such partisan hacks is to say something negative about the other side.

It doesn't matter if it is true, or makes sense, or even if it is immediately revealed to be idiotic.

They are trying to drown out competing viewpoints to avoid having to defend their policies and agenda seriously and honestly.

Because, at some level, they know they cannot.

Liberals. All the intellectual honestly of a crack whore.

 

[Liminal]

I'm pretty sure you're not playing, since you can't name even one single so called policy that Trump has publicly detailed during his faux campaign.

And now more dishonesty.

Why are you so determined to avoid anything of substance?

Feel free to present the evidence that could substantiate your claims.

What claims?

That you have admitted to be ignorant of the policies of a politician you hate?

THat you have ignored the many posters who have provided those policies for you and continued to dishonest pretend to be ignorant?

This thread is full of your behavior doing just that.

In other words: You have no idea about any of Trump's so called policies.

Sly just gave you some more right about. Plenty of other posters are wasting their time presenting you with information for you to ignore.

I didn't claim anything about Trumps Policies. I asked you and POGO which of them you considered the most stupid.

And neither of you were able to come up with squat.

And you both are too dim or too dishonest to see how bad that makes you look.

Birthers evidently don't need to have actual policies and positions; they just need a constituency of dummies to follow them.

 

[Liminal]

Wow. Still playing stupid.

INcredible.

I'm pretty sure you're not playing, since you can't name even one single so called policy that Trump has publicly detailed during his faux campaign.

seal the border
increase funding for VA medical
Repatriation holiday.
etc.
It's been spelled out to you multiple times.

You want detail specifics click here --> Donald Trump on the Issues

The link provides a nearly interesting collection of superficial one liners......more evidence that Trump doesn't know what he stands for or why.

It shows his policies the same as Hillary's web site shows hers. You are a hypocrite expecting more from those who disagree with you than you get from those you agree with.

All that matters to such partisan hacks is to say something negative about the other side.

It doesn't matter if it is true, or makes sense, or even if it is immediately revealed to be idiotic.

They are trying to drown out competing viewpoints to avoid having to defend their policies and agenda seriously and honestly.

Because, at some level, they know they cannot.

Liberals. All the intellectual honestly of a crack whore.

Honesty? You mean like birthers?

 

[Liminal]

I guess it's hard for some people to tell the difference between elucidating policy and vague postering.

Wow. Still playing stupid.

INcredible.

I'm pretty sure you're not playing, since you can't name even one single so called policy that Trump has publicly detailed during his faux campaign.

seal the border
increase funding for VA medical
Repatriation holiday.
etc.
It's been spelled out to you multiple times.

You want detail specifics click here --> Donald Trump on the Issues

The link provides a nearly interesting collection of superficial one liners......more evidence that Trump doesn't know what he stands for or why.

It shows his policies the same as Hillary's web site shows hers. You are a hypocrite expecting more from those who disagree with you than you get from those you agree with.

His website looks very nice. Now I'd like to see Trump himself elaborate on some of these so called positions and policies. I'd like to see if he can.

 

[Pogo]

I'm pretty sure you're not playing, since you can't name even one single so called policy that Trump has publicly detailed during his faux campaign.

And now more dishonesty.

Why are you so determined to avoid anything of substance?

You mean like the OP did by referring to a "poll" that forgot to exist?

Have you ever questioned it when a liberal Authority has told you what you wanted to hear?

I don't even know what the fuck a "liberal Authority" is supposed to be, but I question everything.

Including why you completely ignored the post above.

"Authority" isn't a political entity.

THen you really need to give that some thought, buddy.

Because you obviously have NOT questioned this time around when they told you what you wanted to hear about the REpublican Frontrunner.

And indeed, even as evidence contrary to what they told you is spoon fed to you, you still are actively ignoring it so as to hew to what you have been told to believe.

Again, I don't know what any of this has to do with "Authority" -- I guess we've abandoned that point, which is fine.
I'm not laboring under the delusion that there is a "front runner" -- for any party. Frankly I find it hilarious to watch people drooling over supposed "election polls" in what is not even an election year, as if it means something. It doesn't. If it actually were that time, voters and maybe even some media would be pressing candidates with real questions about nuts-and-bolts details of what they intended to do , and how.

Obviously that's not going on right now, and won't until primaries get under way; this is the clown show phase where the Rumps and the Chafees and the Jindals find their creative ways to make a less than graceful exit. Rump is simply the most obnoxious among them, which is exactly what we should expect given his megalomaniac history. He's basically that column of electronic noise on the radio dial you pass when you're looking for an actual station. I dunno about you but I don't sit on the radio and listen to noise.