[ExI] The Clinton Foundation was a means of gaining access

Adrian Tymes atymes at gmail.com
Thu Aug 25 06:01:17 UTC 2016

On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 7:22 PM, CryptAxe <cryptaxe at gmail.com> wrote:

> I've actually been somewhat surprised by the anti Trump sentiment within
> this mailing list. I essentially "threw my vote away" by voting for Gary
> Johnson. I think I would pick Trump over Hilary though.

I'll make you the same offer I make anyone else in your position.  You vote
for Johnson instead of Trump, and I'll vote for Johnson instead of Clinton.

> Trump seems easier to predict. While obviously motivated by human things
> like greed, his flamboyant attitude I think makes it hard him to conceal
> his true thoughts. You might not agree with his thoughts, and I'm not
> politically savvy so maybe that's actually a bad thing.
> What do you adamant anti Trump extropians think?

"Easier to predict" does not, by itself, a better executive make.  Even a
complete inability to lie would not suffice, although Trump has
demonstrated so much ability to lie that it is no longer newsworthy (unlike
his opponent).

Let there be no mistake.  He is intent on a course that would result in the
slaughter of many innocent lives, and unnecessarily degraded conditions for
many more.  (Perhaps Clinton is too, but far less lives in her case.  It
has been said that the choice between them is a "lesser of two evils"

The best executives are expected to be above the most primitive of human
instincts, and to think before acting.  Watch how Obama governs.  Notice
how he deals with anger - it's not that he doesn't feel it, not that he
doesn't get passionate about issues, but he doesn't lash out at the first
target to come to mind.  When he does direct the forces at his command -
military, economic, political, or otherwise - to strike at someone or some
organization, there is little question that they are they ones who have
incurred his wrath, and at least some effort to limit collateral damage.

Trump, by contrast, has said he would e.g. kick out all Muslims.  He would
find it easiest to start with the most loyal ones, such as the ones in our
military, who trusted America enough to identify themselves as Muslim.
What he would fail to do is actually find any would-be terrorists with
enough sense that they might actually be dangerous (and thus, you know, not
identify as Muslim).  This is obvious to anyone taking but a few moments to
think through the consequences of his proposals.

One of these men upholds law, order, and justice as they have been
practiced in America for centuries.  The other claims he would promote law
and order, but has demonstrated he would do the exact opposite, and might
not understand what "rule of law" truly is.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20160824/6fbcb381/attachment.html>

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list