• Re:OT: was H. Ross Perot Trump Beta?

    From *skriptis@21:1/5 to Sawfish on Sat Jan 11 19:47:07 2025
    Sawfish <sawfish666@gmail.com> Wrote in message:r
    We have many astute political and social observers here at RST, so all we need to do to get an expert, well-considered opinion is to simply ask a question, so, how about it: were Perot and Trump roughly the same contrarian symbol in the vast sea of US
    politics? If they were alike, in what ways? Dissimilar? In what ways?Who needs AI, huh?-- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"Reality is that thing that does not go away when you stop believing in it."--Sawfish~~~~~
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



    I'd say Perrot was more idealistic. You can tell that by the fact he failed?

    Don't get me wrong, Trump is also somewhat of an idealist, he's certainly a bigger idealist than some e.g. career politician.

    But you can't have it 100% your way, probably not even 50%.

    Trump has managed to hit that sweet spot. He sold himself enough.



    He's Kennedy, Nixon type, he's his own man as much as it's possible for him to be in your system with president who's basically a puppet of deep state.

    President is there for a very short period of time and they're there their entire lives.



    https://www.quorum.us/data-driven-insights/who-are-the-longest-serving-members-of-congress/


    Number 1

    Longest-Serving Former Senators
    Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV) — 51 years in office (1959-2010)



    And George Washington was afraid of monarchy being reinstated in the US? ;)





    --




    ----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Scall5@21:1/5 to Sawfish on Sat Jan 11 20:11:25 2025
    On 1/11/2025 12:23 PM, Sawfish wrote:
    We have many astute political and social observers here at RST, so all
    we need to do to get an expert, well-considered opinion is to simply ask
    a question, so, how about it: were Perot and Trump roughly the same contrarian symbol in the vast sea of US politics? If they were alike, in
    what ways? Dissimilar? In what ways?

    Who needs AI, huh?


    Briefly, I greatly admire Ross Perot because:
    1. He did something that hadn't happened in six or more decades; he
    forced (or scared) the Demo/GOP duopoly to balance the federal budget!
    2. He started a strong political third-party that is needed more than
    ever in US politics/government. Granted his party eventually fell apart,
    but at least it was around for a while!

    Trump joined and then took over the GOP. Some of his viewpoints were
    contrarian to the 1980's GOP but his love for excessive budgets was
    right on par. Not to mentioned he allowed COVID shutdowns that would
    have never happened with Reagan.

    Perot was an outsider and Trump became an insider thru his GOP conquest.
    --
    ---------------
    Scall5

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Custos Custodum@21:1/5 to skriptis@post.t-com.hr on Sun Jan 12 01:47:00 2025
    On Sat, 11 Jan 2025 19:47:07 +0100 (GMT+01:00), *skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr> wrote:

    and they're there their entire lives.

    <Applause!>

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Scall5@21:1/5 to Sawfish on Sat Jan 11 21:02:27 2025
    On 1/11/2025 8:38 PM, Sawfish wrote:
    On 1/11/25 6:11 PM, Scall5 wrote:
    On 1/11/2025 12:23 PM, Sawfish wrote:
    We have many astute political and social observers here at RST, so
    all we need to do to get an expert, well-considered opinion is to
    simply ask a question, so, how about it: were Perot and Trump roughly
    the same contrarian symbol in the vast sea of US politics? If they
    were alike, in what ways? Dissimilar? In what ways?

    Who needs AI, huh?


    Briefly, I greatly admire Ross Perot because:
    1. He did something that hadn't happened in six or more decades; he
    forced (or scared) the Demo/GOP duopoly to balance the federal budget!
    2. He started a strong political third-party that is needed more than
    ever in US politics/government. Granted his party eventually fell
    apart, but at least it was around for a while!

    Trump joined and then took over the GOP. Some of his viewpoints were
    contrarian to the 1980's GOP but his love for excessive budgets was
    right on par. Not to mentioned he allowed COVID shutdowns that would
    have never happened with Reagan.

    Perot was an outsider and Trump became an insider thru his GOP conquest.

    But you see the paradox, Scall, right? Because Perot was on the outside,
    it was--and pretty much is--impossible to him to acquire power under the current system, which is what one must work under until it's either
    changed by re-writing the rules from within the system, or by revolution changing the rules from the outside of the system.

    Let me ask you: do you think that at one point Trump was outside of the system as much as Perot? I do, personally.

    Yes, I agree with you. For example, Trump being on the cover of Playboy
    made conservatives like Haig and Rush hate him.

    Now working from this, at what point did Trump become a part of the system?

    When he surprisingly won the election in 2016. His GOP nomination was
    not well attended by the usual GOP players of the previous two decades.
    Many didn't show up. I think once Trump became President, for whatever
    reasons, didn't "drain the swamp". Then with COVID and he allowing the
    lock downs/increased government spending, he was a full insider at that
    point.

    Can you name someone who had a legitimate chance at elected national
    office (pres) who was outside of the system? I'm not being a smart ass,
    but I'm having troubles ever seeing anyone. Maybe Teddy Roosevelt, but
    you know, he was already pres and hence a part of the system, then later
    went Bull Moose, but this was basically an insider coming back disguised
    as an outsider, like Trump 2024.

    Perhaps Colin Power in the early 1990's? Any of the parties would have
    taken him, the Demos, GOP, Independents, Libertarians, Constitution
    Party, and etc. But he didn't have the desire to engage in that fight. I
    can't blame him.

    The closest I'm coming is Huey Long.

    In Roman history, in the Republic, you had the Gracchuses  (Gracchii?)
    and Marius, then Julius Caesar. All these guys were populists.  Sulla
    was a counter-populist. These guys worked outside the system and in
    doing so caused large scale social unrest/disruption.
    --
    ---------------
    Scall5

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From =?UTF-8?Q?Pelle_Svansl=C3=B6s?=@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 12 14:12:17 2025
    On 12/01/2025 4.11, Scall5 wrote:
    On 1/11/2025 12:23 PM, Sawfish wrote:
    We have many astute political and social observers here at RST, so all
    we need to do to get an expert, well-considered opinion is to simply
    ask a question, so, how about it: were Perot and Trump roughly the
    same contrarian symbol in the vast sea of US politics? If they were
    alike, in what ways? Dissimilar? In what ways?

    Who needs AI, huh?


    Briefly, I greatly admire Ross Perot because:
    1. He did something that hadn't happened in six or more decades; he
    forced (or scared) the Demo/GOP duopoly to balance the federal budget!

    Maybe. Maybe not. The credit for actually doing it, giving you the last
    surplus budget goes to Mr Clinton, though. The rule of thumb is: The GOP
    blows it up, Demmies are called in to fix stuffs.

    The easiest way to pull a budget deficit out of the hat is to do the
    second half of "less government, less taxes" without the first. The GOP specialty. Trump did it in the first season too.

    This deficit thingy is way overblown (in the US). Sure, you need to pay interest, but what's a couple of billion off from trillions? The US
    government borrows almost 9/10 of the dollars it needs from domestic
    sources. Borrowing, paying interest amounts to shifting money from one
    pocket to another. While the expenditure takes away from some, it
    benefits the other.

    What debt amounts to is injecting money into the system. Stimulus.
    Paying debt is the opposite. In the end what matters is what the
    stimulus buys. At present, a +3% growth. Ballpark it into dollars, if
    you wish. If you want a comparison, you can look at the trajectory of
    the US and the little Finnish economies. One injected money, the other
    injected fear, uncertainty, and doubt. You can read the results from
    growth charts.

    Biden put $2T into the economy post-pandemic. The growth, the envy of
    the rest of the world, is there now. Unfortunately for Biden the fact
    is, once prices have risen due to inflation, getting the inflation down
    doesn't make the prices go down back to where they were. This is what
    the sod in the trenches sees, and misattributes cause and effect.

    Sad, but that's the way it goes.

    2. He started a strong political third-party that is needed more than
    ever in US politics/government. Granted his party eventually fell apart,
    but at least it was around for a while!

    You can start as many parties as you wish. But first-past-the-post will
    kill them all. It's like gravity, you can't escape it. Newton got it right.

    Again, the good Demmies had a sorely needed federal voting bills
    package. TBH, I doubt proportionality was in that, lol. Anyway, you
    gotta start somewhere. But ... the status quo favours the Republicans,
    so you pretty much know how any effort to change anything will go.

    The fingers all point to one general direction. Again.

    Trump joined and then took over the GOP. Some of his viewpoints were contrarian to the 1980's GOP but his love for excessive budgets was
    right on par. Not to mentioned he allowed COVID shutdowns that would
    have never happened with Reagan.

    Who knows. Reagan did believe in experts, though. I believe the global
    effort in the ozone layer thingy was a pet project of his. At least he
    was in it with the rest. He also believed in containing Moscow with a
    couple of hand-held aircraft missiles. Despite the minuscule costs.

    Perot was an outsider and Trump became an insider thru his GOP conquest.

    Nobody ever believed Trump was an outsider draining swamps. Nobody.
    Well, ok. Maybe bob did. Anyway, it's just political lingo.

    --
    “We need to acknowledge he let us down. He went down a path he shouldn’t have, and we shouldn’t have followed him. We shouldn’t have listened to him, and we can’t let that happen ever again”.
    -- Nikki Haley

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Scall5@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 12 21:33:47 2025
    On 1/12/2025 6:12 AM, Pelle Svanslös wrote:
    On 12/01/2025 4.11, Scall5 wrote:
    On 1/11/2025 12:23 PM, Sawfish wrote:
    We have many astute political and social observers here at RST, so
    all we need to do to get an expert, well-considered opinion is to
    simply ask a question, so, how about it: were Perot and Trump roughly
    the same contrarian symbol in the vast sea of US politics? If they
    were alike, in what ways? Dissimilar? In what ways?

    Who needs AI, huh?


    Briefly, I greatly admire Ross Perot because:
    1. He did something that hadn't happened in six or more decades; he
    forced (or scared) the Demo/GOP duopoly to balance the federal budget!

    Maybe. Maybe not. The credit for actually doing it, giving you the last surplus budget goes to Mr Clinton, though. The rule of thumb is: The GOP blows it up, Demmies are called in to fix stuffs.

    I would give more credit to George Bush Sr. as he even went back on his
    "read my lips, no new taxes" vow to balance the budget.
    --
    ---------------
    Scall5

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)