The Third Adams Presidency

By -
After Donald Trump himself, who was the most important person to Trump's victory?

I vote Scott Adams. The man had quite a year!

Comments

  1. Andy5:33 PM

    The funny thing is, he wasn't even supporting Trump. He was just explaining Trump, for the most part.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Football Nut8:39 AM

      By a country mile it was Ann Coulter. I think only once before has a single individual affected an election to this extent. From what I recall, Coulter wrote her book and appeared in a debate with Jorge Ramos. After seeing that Trump ordered the book and placed immigration at the centre of his campaign. She also kept contact with the campaign via e-mailing Lewandowski and berating them for going off script.

      I enjoyed reading Scott Adams even if his, not so concealed, advocacy for Trump but not sure he affected the campaign so much as he explained it.
      http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/02/magazine/how-donald-trump-set-off-a-civil-war-within-the-right-wing-media.html

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose...
Read more