LOA Trumps Hillary
I knew 8 years ago, when Hillary was campaigning against Obama, that she could never be president. I was surprised when she got so far this time … but it is clear why she didn’t win. It would simply not be possible. She doesn’t believe in it, she only wants it. Trump believed in it.
… also, though it is not about how #LOA elected Trump, I am so glad we don’t have to listen to Hillary for 4 years. Listening to her pure, whiny, filthy voice for just a day yesterday turned my stomach to vomit. Sure, Trump is an asshole … but Hillary, and straight from her own mouth by listening to her, is a deceitful vindictive power-mad crazy bitch with no character nor a wit of authenticity. I realize that sounds harsh but it is how she appears … it is what she, herself, projects. At least Trump is authentic in what he is even if I don’t like it.
I personally think seth spent way too much energy listening to what Hillary said, instead of reading her actual vibration … as well as reacting to what Trump said, and again, not reading Trumps vibration. Quite frankly, it is pretty clear Trump said what he said “to win”, he knew what would get actual votes, what Americans wanted to hear … I really have no idea what kind of President Trump will now be. I don’t think anyone does. It is very clear what kind of president Hillary would have been, she has been there before and this time would not have had Bill’s charisma to stand behind … and another Hillary Clinton presidency would have sucked even worse than the first.
Well that’s one reason you should avoid #MakeShitUp about others, because you almost invariably get it wrong. For example: i hardly ever listened to #Hillary. Mostly, as much as i could stand, i listened to #Trump and was pained by his #lies which included almost everything he said. And his nasty tone of voice and the vindictive things that he has done. I posted #Hillary’s closing message because it was pretty much what i would have said to the nation myself and in the voice that i would have said it … notwistanding your own subjective reaction to it.
Incidentally way back … i think it was blogged here somwhere … i predicted (1) that #Trump would win the nonimation, and then later (2) that he would win the election. Notice i predicted it before it happened. “Predicting Events after they happen” is kind of silly … especially when you take your brownie points for it
Didn’t make anything up seth. Everything I said that was specific to you was straight out of your diatribe about Hillary yesterday.
Well that is contra factual, nathan … case in point is what you said here …
I personally think seth spent way too much energy listening to what Hillary said,
Apparently #LOA uses a heaping bushel of #RetroPreCognition in her recipe!
Where is your comment about voting yesterday Seth? It talked about us listening to what Hillary said. Wherever it is.
#MyVote2016 … read it exactly for what i said in it.
You judgement that i spent “way to much energy listeining to Hillary” is just your own subjective judgement spoken for its value to yourself … it has nothing to do with what i did. I watched that one video, and i heard her voice, and compared it to trump’s lieing nasty voice, and immediately grocked that i would much rather listen to that way of speaking than trump’s. And that is all i actually said. Whatever else you made up about “my energies spent” was all you baby … all you … not me at all.
#btw, as the polls started indicating that #hillary would win, i did kind of anticipitate that she would. But my initial accessment was apparently more accurate. You can ask denise, i told her Tump could win thing thing but she kept insisting that was impossible.
Oh well, now that this is a thing that has happened … circumstances will change accordingly. Now i switch to a mode “WATCH what happens independant of my own motives” … quite literally i am no longer involved. That level of Federal governemt is not something with which i seem to be capable of being usefully conscious from where my life is today.
All I was referring to was “me, i am trying to listening to what the candidates actually say and do”.
My entire statement was about that. Nothing made up there at all. As I have said elsewhere, trying to figure things out by what people say and do is a slow and out of one’s business process. People say and do all kinds of things for all kinds of reasons and even they don’t know why a lot of the time. What you know inside about the people you are creating is far more useful in knowing them than what they say or do.
Listening to what a person actually says and does is the best way to predict what they will do in the future. Listening to your notions of what they will do is the very worst way of predicting what they will do in the future. That is a theory which i am pretty sure could be objectively verified in labratory circumstances.
It sounds like your beliefs in that regard vary from my experience.
Yes, the way you say it, that is true. I would never listen to ones own notions about things. That is very unreliable. Not what I have ever said.
You seem to be confusing the references. Here i will use you exact words applied to my theory.
Listening to “what you know inside about the people you are creating” is not useful in predicting what they will actually do or say in the future. Listening to what they actually do and say will be of much more valuable in predicting their future behavior.
Yes, exactly. I said “what you know inside”, which is very very different from “ones own notions” which is mostly or all just imagination.
I talk about what one knows, the direct knowledge of what one is creating … the stuff Peter Ralston talks about … not just #MadeUpShit. I am talking about the stuff you get through direct intuition, passion, and heart. The stuff you know is true both by it’s vibrational signature, and by the fact that you are aware that you did not generate it out of your imagination.
Well fine, we have not just a little bit of work to do to actually know “intuitively” together what being conscious with what is happening in Washington truly means to us and to the rest of the nation.
But as an example look at what has actually happened between us just now. I created a model of both Hillary and Trump and the Congress and what is happening in Washington as closely as i could given the facts that get filtered to me via CNN, MSMBC, FOX and the Internet. I spoke to the world that i prefer to hear the the one over the other. You basically told me that i should have spoke differently.
The transaction between us is of the form, “my intuition is better than your intuition”. Come on now nathan you must realize that you will always feel that way about your intuition. That is the very nature of it … the very nature of what Peter Ralston might call “direct knowledge”.
So, how does what you just did advance what we are conscious of together?
Me, i am pretty much at the end of what i can truly counsciously interact with what is going on in Washington. I had my vote, that is how our democratic system kind of works … so that is something that i did. I know that because i know intuitively when i am usefully interacting with another #BeIng and when i am just creating more static in the environment.
I didn’t say my intuition is better than your intuition. Every time you speak, you say you don’t use intuition, as above. You say “I created a model of both Hillary and Trump and the Congress and what is happening in Washington as closely as i could given the facts that get filtered to me via CNN, MSMBC, FOX and the Internet.” That is not intuition, that’s you guessing based on circumstances and filling in what you don’t know with your imagination.
Since you are creating it all, tapping into that creative knowledge is a much better source than all this circumstantial #spin and armchair piloting. Right?
i say creative knowledge comes from conscious interaction, the more the interaction the deeper is the intuition. In this case my intuition came from my interaction by listening and speaking and even making up theories and testing them and then acting just according to what felt right in my heart.
I know i am participating in being conscious when that is happening. When i am sleeping or day dreaming or imagining somthing i am not being conscious like that and my actual intuition is not getting better.
I interacted as above just as very much as i had energy for in this election. It was not the most important thing in my life. When the time felt right, i spoke.
#btw, how much did you interact with the election process? Did you even listen to a complete Trump rally when he was not on the teleprompter? How did what he said make you feel inside?
To judge what i said, it would be better to revisit this thought in 4 years. But that time we will both have the benefit of knowing more of what happened. Then our intuitions will be better informed and less just imagined.
You say i don’t use my intuition … LOL … how do you rationalize that as not being just the same thing as saying, “my intuition is better than your intuition” ?
Agreed. I am talking about being more conscious, not imagining or day dreaming. Quite the opposite. The difference is in the rest you refer to a conscious process that is like playing Monopoly compared to participating directly in the stock market. It is not wrong, it is simply circumstantial modeling as a kind of sudo consciousness, that’s all.
When i am sleeping or day dreaming or imagining somthing i am not being conscious.
Very little. I could tell right from the start that I was creating Trump as a new variable. Listening to him would not have done much for me at all. Mostly, I ignored everything until a couple of days ago, when I tuned into my creation, and discovered what Trump and Hillary had now become in my creation, and wrote about that on your post where I said I couldn’t vote here in Florida, but if I could I would probably vote for Trump.
how much did you interact with the election process
Actually that is what you say. Everywhere here, and even in the above posts, you say that you favor circumstantial modeling over intuition. Most likely you do add in some intuition to that process, but the way you characterize it, what you do is not intuition. That’s what you say, not me.
You say i don’t use my intuition
Well this natural language word, “intuition” has been used by #RS and #PR and now you. I have stdied it pretty much all of my life. I think i do know what you mean when you use it … especially what you say above.
But to really communicate between us and be talking about the same thing, intuition, we need to start using example and particulars. Otherwise we are just waving at generalized shdows even knowing that the shadows you wave at are different than the shadows i see. In the end what we can gock together would be how the examples themselves #RingsTrue intuitively.
Then too the domain of the examples will vary. It makes a lot of difference if we are talking about the most important things in our personal lives, how we will dance together tomorrow, what we are to have for dinner tonight, how to fix selling on Amazon, how we will make talking domains work and/or survive, or who to choose to represent our interests in Washington, or how to communicate to a blind person how to use this, which is something i just did. In all of those cases what you call “intuition” would be developed differently.
I don’t know if those kinds of examples of intuition will emerge here … if you are ready for them (LOL) … maybe you prefer to leave all of that to waving at shadows … after all you will have complete freedom as long as they just remain shadows.
https://www.powerthesaurus.org/intuition – you are speaking of something similar to Direct Consciousness vs Science perhaps – at least for me.
It’s not all that shadowy. mark pretty much nailed it right here Direct Consciousness vs Science.
It’s not rocket science, just direct knowing, consciousness … what I do when I run through the woods naked on a moonless night and never hit a tree or fall off a cliff, what #PR does when he wins a martial arts tourny, what I do when I tune into what I created Hillary and Trump to be, what Steiner does when he creates art, or gives a lecture, what athletes do when they win gold medals by pico seconds, what high performing capitalists do when they choose the winning place to put their money over and over. Simply tuning into knowing … and as #PR says, it is not knowledge coming to you, it is you.
It’s interesting how mark and seth each have ½ the picture. Almost as if they are paternal twins.
Mark has the knowledge, but is stuck in a forever looping ego structure that won’t let him use the knowledge he has.
Seth has the freedom and ideals to be able to use virtually any knowledge, beyond most, but he is stuck in a physical belief model that he won’t let go of for fear he would loose himself and his basic humanity … even though opposite would be true.
yes i know the way you and mark talk of those. your personal intiituion in some of those domains i can say nothing about … they are too deep within you. I am glad that you have them, i have some of those too … they feel really good. You expressing those in sufficient resolution is always inspiritonal to me. I even like to express my own in a way that they can be felt by others. Outside of that i don’t know of any use we can put to those kind of things together.
But some of those examples of intuiton, which you and i mentioned, get developed quite differently. Yet you apparently presume that intuition is always just there. So apparetly you conclude, given that you have this intuition in that context, you have the same kind of intuition in a completely different contex even one in which you never interacted. It is like given a person developed intuition in programming with java script, suddenly he has the intuition of how to move in yoga. In my experience, intuition does not work that way … rather it is extremely context sensitive.
Perhps thirds, nathan thinks he knows it all passing judgment on the other two.
#btw, if you have ever actually listened to what i actually say, you woud not make up a thing about me that could possibly be described by the wrods, “seth is stuck in a physical belief model that he won’t let go of for fear he would loose himself and his basic humanity”
Try excluding that made up conception from your model of me and you may be able to actually hear what i am saying myself quite independant of that concoction.
and #btw, #btw
a little example is directly in front of us here.
Both nathan and mark have independantly claimed (or implied ) to me that you have intuition … and now both of you have sited that intuition in the contxt of politics. Yet i seriously doubt that you two will ever agree on anything to say or do in that domain. From that i conclude that what you refer to as your “intuition” in the political domain is nothing more than your own subjective opinions … probably spoken only for your own self serving interests.
I get an entirely different impression from taking to people who are actually interacting in the political domain, and are accomplishing useful effect there. From those people i #grock something that i would deem worthy of the descriptor “intuition”. Incidentally one does not become president of the United States without developing political intuition.
So let us be clear on what we are talking about to each other. Or not. Rather we can continue to wave subjective generalized shadows at each other … you are free to do that just as you will …and to your hearts content. That is their nature, that is what you can do with them. You are free to go in that direction … just as far and as fast as you can. Me, i will #WATCH to see if you ever will meet.
Not much content there. Mostly just finger pointing. Not even any points I can cleanly respond to.
My guess about all of that it that it is your personal way of justifying to not acknowledge direct knowing and consciousness. Which if for yourself, is your choice. But you are generalizing how others interact politically in characterization that supports your own personal box. Not very nice. I would agree that in general politics is devoid of consciousness … but it is unfair to say that your personal choice of circumstantial modeling is the way things are for everyone.
Nope. I don’t think I know it all. I think I create it all. Knowing it is quite another thing and requires consciousness and direct knowing, as #PR says, and I have access to that intermittently. You decide the mittance of this one. And so will I.
Nathan thinks he knows it all
Most of this #BackAndForth is as stale as yesterday’s political campaign propaganda. Maybe only the #juice of #PilesOfEgoo (used to be called #RWG) now deprecated. ZZzz..
Yep. At least about the usefulness and the staleness. The rwg part is all yours dear uncle. No other participants here.
Conversation forked to thought 22293
- Thought Bullying is decay of what we are being together with 871 viewings related by tag "Trump".
- Thought A Law of Attraction Event Story with 810 viewings related by tag "LOA".
- Thought Axiom of being: A being lives by changing relative to others, not relative to itself with 655 viewings related by tag "being".
- Thought Did Putin blackmail Trump? with 609 viewings related by tag "trump".
- Thought Trump's moral confusion with 503 viewings related by tag "Trump".
- Thought #Trump #Putin with 488 viewings related by tag "trump".
- Thought #Integrity #authenticity with 443 viewings related by tag "loa".
- Thought Thought, Feeling, and Will with 380 viewings related by tag "RS".
- Thought What is happening in Sweden? with 376 viewings related by tag "Trump".
- Thought Buddah Lied with 338 viewings related by tag "ringstrue".
- Thought (clone) Should presidents tweet? with 333 viewings related by tag "Trump".
- Thought Seeking Information with 328 viewings related by tag "LOA".
- Thought The perception of decay with 318 viewings related by tag "RS".
- Thought Socrates Cafe Question: Should presidents tweet? with 312 viewings related by tag "Trump".
- Thought Love - Lying with 281 viewings related by tag "lies".
- Thought The 2017 White House correspondents’ dinner with 267 viewings related by tag "Trump".
- Thought Inquiry: The nature of an individual to a group. with 266 viewings related by tag "RS".
- Thought [title (23251)] with 261 viewings related by tag "Trump".
- Thought cognitive dissonance with 258 viewings related by tag "BeIng".
- Thought Rudolf Steiner speaks of the CycleOfDoing with 236 viewings related by tag "RS".
- Thought about: Syrian War - comment 75615 with 235 viewings related by tag "loa".
- Thought Zen & the Art of the Right-Wrong Game with 230 viewings related by tag "rwg".
- Thought Trumps Inauguration Address with 221 viewings related by tag "Trump".
- Thought The Medium is the Message with 220 viewings related by tag "btw".
- Thought Is Trump's internal filter all fucked up? with 201 viewings related by tag "Trump".
- Thought Calling Wolf with 197 viewings related by tag "MakeShitUp".
- Thought What Trump means by "fake news" ... with 190 viewings related by tag "Trump".
- Thought The story of being, is not being with 189 viewings related by tag "being".
- Thought Teasing out the "will" with 188 viewings related by tag "rs".
- Thought Enforcement enacted. with 186 viewings related by tag "MakeShitUp".
- Thought Trump at Nato meeting with 176 viewings related by tag "trump".
- Thought Accepting responsibility for every thing in your life causes joy and power. with 174 viewings related by tag "btw".
- Thought Doing things for others with 172 viewings related by tag "LOA".
- Thought Negative Feedback with 168 viewings related by tag "rwg".
- Thought #WillToBelieve with 168 viewings related by tag "LOA".
- Thought Sensing ... with 167 viewings related by tag "loa".
- Thought Politics is the Art of making the possible happen ... with 151 viewings related by tag "RWG".
- Thought Taking Control with 141 viewings related by tag "loa".
- Thought about: Megaphone vs Free Speech vs Political Correctness - comment 73418 with 140 viewings related by tag "PR".
- Thought Socretes Cafe Tuesday April 18 2017 with 138 viewings related by tag "RWG".
- Thought Copy of - An agreement to avoid an unthinkable war with 137 viewings related by tag "Trump".
- Thought [title (21932)] with 137 viewings related by tag "btw".
- Thought What process creates consciousness? with 136 viewings related by tag "pr".
- Thought DMT - and the reality drug with 131 viewings related by tag "LOA".
- Thought Agreements are vunerable to lies with 126 viewings related by tag "lies".
- Thought Subscribing to the NYT online ... with 123 viewings related by tag "RingsTrue".
- Thought Example of a misassociation with 122 viewings related by tag "PR".
- Thought Watching our indexing at Google with 121 viewings related by tag "btw".
- Thought are your thoughts yours alone or are they really available to all who can tune them in? with 118 viewings related by tag "LOA".
- Thought What comes first ... thinking or doing ... er, always? with 115 viewings related by tag "LOA".