It's not called the Conservative Party. This is called the Republican Party.

About: transcript: donald trump - abc news

TRUMP: I'm going to do what I have to do. I have millions of people that voted for me because I have strong borders, because I want strong trade. I want good trade. I want trade. I don't want to be an isolationist, but what's happening with China, what's happening with Japan, what's happening with Mexico, they're just absolutely eating our lunch. It's a shame. It's terrible.

So I have to say true to my principles, also. And I'm a conservative, but don't forget, this is called the Republican Party. It's not called the Conservative Party. You know, there are Conservative Parties. This is called the Republican Party.

I am a conservative.

I’ve always thought of the Republican party as just club to fight the other club. The issues actually being quite arbitrary and changeable as the weather … just as long as they end up being in opposition. It is just like the RWG. Apparently Trump agrees. Conservatives, like Ryan and Cruz, who are passionately committed to principles which are not actually popular enough go win the electoral college would have lost the election. So the narrative will go back to the old fight game … unconfused by a set principles which cobbeled together to rationalize one elite over another.

Comments

Mark de LA says

Mark de Los Angeles 2016-05-08 09:21:50 [item 20905#51885]

I.E. The same thing is going on with the Democrat Party (not Democratic) . Personally, I dislike the term conservative anyway – not sexy enough for the modern age. Everything these days is termed Extreme – extreme sports, energy ….. fill in the blanks .
Israel has currently 11 parties in their Knesset (parliament) & many more on the outside & the past. Duality is not the only prescription. In general after an election they all negotiate with each other for seats in the Knesset. Here apparently the candidates buy the reps with empty promises.
Your predilection to fight, argue & joust sees the parties as there for combat. I see them there to represent the interests of the electorate since we all can’t show up in DC & get it done with elections; notwithstanding whatever it may be. See search threefoldness for my ideas. Given the current administration we would have been a lot better off if it hadn’t been done at all.

Seth 2016-05-08 10:08:10 [item 20905#51886]

well i suppose we could model politicians as representing the passions of their constituents on particular issues. but one problem with that model is that the mix of issues on which a politician runs is chosen by the politician to get themselves elected … but that mix never really matches any real electorate. How many citizens who think they must have the lower prices afforded by globalization, hold that the life of a fetus should trump the choice of a mother, want manufacturing jobs back here in America, and also want to keep Mexicans in Mexico? Now you will certainly be able to pick an ontology to cobble that together. But I claim that match is so arbitrary and complex and vague, that a representation model totally breaks down. It just is not happening that way at all, notwistanding ideals that it should.

Now i agree that the issues are not all binary dualities. They never are that simple. Rather the issues are related as in a network. We can frequently analyze the relationships in dualities, where the more of the one implies the less of the other. But that does not mean that we reify the dualities. Perhaps the multi partisan Israeli parliament gets closer to a representative government. Maybe it is time for America to scrap the two party fight system.

Wow so conservitives break into their own party … then Trump still runs with the Republican banner … and Bernie runs as a populist socialist … and we have a 4 way battle. A 4 way works, a 3 way would not … think about it.

Mark de Los Angeles 2016-05-08 10:16:12 [item 20905#51887]

The one with the highest # of votes usually is the leader of state – Likud = Netanyahu – the Prime Minister (election) . Anyway we in the US are a Democtratic-Republic NOT a Parliamentary Democracy. The individual states balance the collective of the United States.
The interests of the people NOT the passions are what the representatives are supposed to represent. We are not a MOB

of rioters.

Seth 2016-05-08 10:23:40 [item 20905#51888]

well the idea that the plethora of states balance the collective United States is interesting and perhaps should be thrown into the mix.

but the idea that a politician represents the interests of his people rather than their passions ← seems to me but a hollow ideal.

YEP! Principles, Laws, Order …. don’t mean much of a FUCK any more. With the 4th Estate (the M$M), we are just a managed & paid-for bunch of sheep.

(stuck with the bill for being slaughtered)

see also s bread and circuses

Seth says

Seth 2016-05-08 10:58:18 [item 20905#51891]

well when presented with a bunch of principles on the one hand, and what actually happens on the other, me i will always go what happens. the principles are explanations at best … usually just rationalizations … and at the worst wishful fictions.

top down does not usually work … though i suppose that ideally it should

Mark de Los Angeles 2016-05-08 11:01:56 [item 20905#51892]

YEP, what happens is another way of saying one has no fucking responsibility for any of it – it just happens!

Seth 2016-05-08 11:09:22 [item 20905#51894]

i don’t think that follows at all. It just say that the principles are not responsible for what happens. My experience in this life tells me over and over again that principles are not the controlling factor. Of course that could just be me … perhaps your principles are controlling what happens in your life … or perhaps you are rationalizing to your self that they do. Me, i cannot be honest with you and claim that for myself.

Mark de Los Angeles 2016-05-08 11:13:30 [item 20905#51895]

YEP, YEP! – However I use principles to inspire – some dunderheads are only inspired by drugs, alcohol, violent mob agitation, & force ….. I get that….

Principles, Laws, Order …. don’t mean much of a FUCK any more.

Seth 2016-05-08 11:17:29 [item 20905#51896]

yep yep. principles are just talk, and talk is cheep. instead go with what happens.

Mark de Los Angeles 2016-05-08 11:25:01 [item 20905#51898]

Yep chase what happens, forgetting perhaps you might be at cause.

Mark de Los Angeles 2016-05-08 11:26:17 [item 20905#51899]

Here is what a thesaurus think are synonyms for unpricipled (no principles):
https://www.powerthesaurus.org/unprincipled

to me principles are just elements of the story … of the narrative … they are in its Kontext. And, i would say, don’t leave home without a story … without its Kontext … a narriative is essential to life … i don’t know how to live without it. So in that regard i am just like you … i look for ideals to inspire the narrative of my life. But do ideals motivate? … they do not.

Anyway, the ideals that politicians talk, usually don’t inspire me at all.

Seth says

Seth 2016-05-08 11:20:59 [item 20905#51897]

here is an example: a perfect circle is an ideal. a wheel modeled after that ideal will roll better and better. but what happens in the world is king, which is why they make tires out of rubber.

Mark de Los Angeles 2016-05-08 11:28:41 [item 20905#51900]

Nobody is talking about ideals . Just you. Must be a way of haggling. Principles move (motivate, emotion) being into doing.

Seth 2016-05-08 11:48:59 [item 20905#51902]

well maybe you can distinguish between an ideal and a principle … but to me a principle is an ideal. a more specific term is not something to be distinguished from its more general classification.

Mark de Los Angeles 2016-05-08 13:05:19 [item 20905#51903]

Yep, neither do your munges. All just the same o sam o… Anyway I don’t give a shit about the shit on this train of thought anymore .. I’lll let it whatever happen happen

Seth 2016-05-08 13:27:24 [item 20905#51904]

fair enough … or at least that comment hung together well enough in your current Kontext to get uttered.

the only strange thing about it is that it went without saying … in other words it did’nt matter in an ideal narrative whether you said it or not … it is in fact a “whatever happens happening” ← hmmm, do you like that kind of happening?

Mark de Los Angeles 2016-05-08 13:34:58 [item 20905#51905]

Yep, your contribution was pretty worthless too! Enjoy the feeling of nothing happening – the reflection of dust in a hall of mirrors blown to smitherines by a whirlwind of farting porpoises in a sea not happening on Neptune; “thinner than piss on a rock” – LBJ.

well my contribution in this thought and this train was at least grasping for a narrative … albiet not yet completely expressed. your judgment of that, howerr, certainly did not form part of that narrative, even though it was provoking it. in other words it is your judgments that is out of place here … just static …. not a rose grown out of manure … rather a turd squeezed out for relief.

It's not called the Conservative Party. This is called the Republican Party.

About: transcript: donald trump - abc news

Tags

Comments

See Also